Linus Torvalds wrote:
On Sat, 27 May 2006, Jeff Garzik wrote:
I don't object, but ata_wait_idle() is completely pointless.
Ahh, you're right. I used it originally because I wanted just the value
for ata_ok(), and the other ata_ok() user got it that way.
Jens - willing to test one more thing? Instead of using ata_wait_idle,
what about just
ata_busy_wait(ap, ATA_BUSY | ATA_DRQ, 200000);
in case your issue actually comes from DRQ being on for some strange
reason (DMA in progress for some bootup inquiry command by the bios?)
Was DRQ ever actually asserted for him?
Regardless, the above line is "conservative" and safe and OK.
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
