James Bottomley wrote:
As I read the code Mark sent me, current libata will only accept ATA_16 for ATAPI devices (whether type 5 or not) ... pehaps this needs to be altered?
It could be. Both ATA_12 and ATA_16 are just ways of getting a taskfile sent down to the LLD, and ATA_12 is merely a restricted subset of ATA_16 so it is not really necessary here. I think that given the opcode conflict with "BLANK", it may be best for the moment to just not bother with ATA_12 for libata ATAPI. We don't really have a need for ATA_12 anyway, as ATA_16 is more flexible. And any application code that uses these isn't going to want to have to vary its commands between ATA_12 and ATA_16 depending upon the target. I think they'll all just go straight for ATA_16 for uniformity and to minimize testing drudgery. hdparm will certainly use only ATA_16 once it becomes available in SCSI/libata. Cheers - To unsubscribe from this list: 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
