[CentOS] hdparm: Inappropriate ioctl for device
centos.newsgroup at sandsengen.com
Wed Sep 7 15:14:02 UTC 2005
Thank you very much for your apply. No there's no specific issue, I am
doing studies on linux and now, optimizing the linux system. Started on
the disc's, I'm also trying to customizing a kernel for my system's.
Just digging in, and digging my own grave I guess. :)
Bryan J. Smith wrote:
> Kai <centos.newsgroup at sandsengen.com> wrote:
>>Does it exist a tool for sata? Or are there no need?
> Has nothing to do with SATA (although libata does, see
> hdparm _only_ works when the Integrated Drive Electronics
> (IDE) are talking directly to the system over the AT
> Attachment (ATA) arbitrator.
> IN OTHER WORDS: That means the device _must_ appear as a
> /dev/hd* block device so hdparm can work.
> When the device is supported via the SCSI subsystem, which is
> typical of newer ATA/SATA drivers that are not yet feature
> complete, all bets are off. They _may_ be supported via
> various SCSI-2 commands, but most of the time, they are not.
> YOUR BEST BET: Use "modinfo -p" on the vendor's SCSI driver
> to see what options are supported at load time.
> Understand that ATA is typically statically compiled in for
> all ATA device support, and hdparm is a way to control
> individual ATA channels. Unlike SCSI modules, which can have
> individual module options, and therefore can be individually
> Now there is the libata support library. I haven't
> investigated it much, let alone I don't know if it requires
> ATA (hd) or it can also support SCSI (sd). I think it can
> support both, but I haven't gotten into it yet to even know
> what it features.
> IN THE END: SATA requires _little_ optimization. There is
> no "EIDE" or other "PIO" IDE backward compatibility AFAIK,
> only full UltraATA compliant modes. SATA was designed to
> _avoid_ a lot of the issues ATA had with EIDE and other
> backward compatibility, while still be backward compatible
> with newer ATA specifications.
> So, are you having a particular issue with SATA?
> If so, have you investigated the SATA module's options yet?
> If not, then that's your first move.
More information about the CentOS