Tejun Heo wrote:
Make ata_set_mode() responsible for determining whether to take port
or device offline on failure. ata_dev_set_xfermode() and
ata_dev_set_mode() indicate error to the caller instead of disabling
port directly on failure. Also, for consistency, ata_dev_present()
check is done in ata_set_mode() instead of ata_dev_set_mode().
Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <htejun@xxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/scsi/libata-core.c | 56 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------------
1 files changed, 36 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)
07934616ecb83d7bac2adfe9eb32f5173feb32ff
diff --git a/drivers/scsi/libata-core.c b/drivers/scsi/libata-core.c
index b7595bf..6826181 100644
--- a/drivers/scsi/libata-core.c
+++ b/drivers/scsi/libata-core.c
@@ -64,7 +64,8 @@
static unsigned int ata_dev_init_params(struct ata_port *ap,
struct ata_device *dev);
static void ata_set_mode(struct ata_port *ap);
-static void ata_dev_set_xfermode(struct ata_port *ap, struct ata_device *dev);
+static unsigned int ata_dev_set_xfermode(struct ata_port *ap,
+ struct ata_device *dev);
static void ata_dev_xfermask(struct ata_port *ap, struct ata_device *dev);
static unsigned int ata_unique_id = 1;
@@ -1754,20 +1755,28 @@ int ata_timing_compute(struct ata_device
return 0;
}
ACK 1-4 in this patchset, but dropping due to dropped patches in
previous patchset.
I have the following concern with this patch (#3) however:
-static void ata_dev_set_mode(struct ata_port *ap, struct ata_device *dev)
+static int ata_dev_set_mode(struct ata_port *ap, struct ata_device *dev)
{
- if (!ata_dev_present(dev) || (ap->flags & ATA_FLAG_PORT_DISABLED))
- return;
I think you drop too many ATA_FLAG_PORT_DISABLED tests in this patch,
leading the code to potentially miss a previously-flagged PORT_DISABLED
(perhaps by an LLDD).
Jeff
-
: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ide" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
