On Sat, May 27 2006, Mark Lord wrote:
> On Saturday 27 May 2006 18:36, Jens Axboe wrote:
> > On Sat, May 27 2006, Mark Lord wrote:
> > > Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > > >
> > > >On Sun, 28 May 2006, Jens Axboe wrote:
> > > >>Works for me too, I changed the delay to match the 200000 above just to
> > > >>be on the safe side.
> > > >
> > > >That's insane. That was _not_ what I expected. That wasn't actually
> > > >supposed to fix anything at all for somebody who had problems.
> > >
> > > The newly added ata_wait_idle() call waits on both BUSY and DRQ,
> > > so perhaps the wait on DRQ was what "fixed" it this time for Jens?
> >
> > It must be, unless the changed delay makes difference (unlikely).
> >
>
> So a better trial for you (to answer Linus) might be this patch:
>
> ---
> --- stock-2.6.17-rc4-git1/drivers/scsi/libata-core.c 2006-05-27 16:58:05.000000000 -0400
> +++ linux/drivers/scsi/libata-core.c 2006-05-27 18:35:02.000000000 -0400
> @@ -4297,6 +4297,11 @@
> int ata_device_resume(struct ata_port *ap, struct ata_device *dev)
> {
> if (ap->flags & ATA_FLAG_SUSPENDED) {
> + u8 status1, status2;
> + status1 = ata_chk_status(ap);
> + ata_busy_wait(ap, ATA_BUSY, 200000);
> + status2 = ata_chk_status(ap);
> + printk("ATA status1=%02x status2=%02x\n", status1, status2);
> ap->flags &= ~ATA_FLAG_SUSPENDED;
> ata_set_mode(ap);
> }
Inspired by your last posting, I already booted this:
+ u8 status1, status2, status3;
+ status1 = ata_chk_status(ap);
+ ata_busy_wait(ap, ATA_BUSY, 200000);
+ status2 = ata_chk_status(ap);
+ status3 = ata_wait_idle(ap);
+ printk("s 1/2/3 %x/%x/%x\n", status1, status2, status3);
with the rest being as posted before. It gives me:
s 1/2/3 80/50/50
on resume.
--
Jens Axboe
-
: 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
