Hi, Anthony Foiani,

I found a MPC8315ERDB rev1.0 board and did some tests.
First there is no limit speed issue on the board, so it seems it may only h=
appen on the MPC8315DS board.
Second, the SATA can work well with NOR write operation on the ERDB board.=
=20
So the two issues happened to you should be board issues.


Best Regards,=20
Shaohui Xie

-----Original Message-----
From: Anthony Foiani [mailto:tkil@scrye.com]
Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2013 8:30 AM
To: Xie Shaohui-B21989
Cc: Wood Scott-B07421; linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: SATA hang on 8315E triggered by heavy flash write?
=20
Shaohio --
=20
Once again, thanks for the reply.
=20
Xie Shaohui-B21989 [off-list ref] writes:
=20

quoted

it seems [recovery or lack of recovery is] not due to speed limiting
code, 1.5Gbps is still used to recover link.

=20
Right, I noticed this in my later email on this topic.
=20

quoted

for the speed limit issue, I checked 3.4.rc7 kernel, there seems a
place can be used to limit the speed for 8315:

	if (!of_device_is_compatible(ofdev->dev.of_node, "fsl,mpc8315-

sata")) {

quoted

		temp =3D ioread32(csr_base + TRANSCFG);
		temp =3D temp & 0xffffffe0;
		iowrite32(temp | TRANSCFG_RX_WATER_MARK, csr_base + TRANSCFG);
	} else {
		/* the speed limitation code for 8315 may can be put here.
		* just move the original code which wrapped by "#ifdef

CONFIG_MPC8315_DS" here.

quoted

		* please let me know if you will give a try. */
	}

=20
It's not clear that all uses of the MPC8315 SATA controller have this
problem.  It obviously occured on the 8315DS, but apparently that board
never made it to production; it might or might not happen on the 8315ERDB=

;

and it clearly happens on my vendor's board.
=20
Given this lack of knowledge, Scott Wood was very hesitant to implement
any far-reaching changes, because we could not pin down exactly what had
to be tested.
=20
My original patch:
=20
  http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.ports.ppc.embedded/58710
=20
did the speed limiting directly in the sata_fsl code; Jeff Garzik
mentioned that there was some existing infrastructure for this, and I
inferred that he would prefer that I use it.
=20
So that's what my final patch does, and it's keyed off a single OF value.
=20
There's a small chance that I'll have the opportunity to move the project
to 3.9 (especially if that release gets declared long-term-stable).  Even
then, I unfortunately won't have the bandwidth to pursue getting any of
these approaches into mainline.
The best I can do is get them onto the lists so that others might be able
to benefit later.
=20
Either way, thanks again.  I'll try to put together a package for my
vendor to test with; once I have demonstrated that there is a problem
with their hardware, they have been gracious about accepting that result
and pursuing it with Freescale if necessary.
=20
Thanks again for your help!
=20
Best regards,
Anthony Foiani