Mikael Pettersson wrote:
On Thu, 08 Feb 2007 08:50:09 -0500, Jeff Garzik wrote:
Mikael Pettersson wrote:
This patch fixes an oversight which caused sata_promise to
not perform cable detection on the TX2plus chips' PATA ports.
Signed-off-by: Mikael Pettersson <mikpe@xxxxxxxx>
---
This patch adds yet another is-PATA-or-SATA? check, but it's in a
cold path so shouldn't matter much. This will be cleaned up if/when
PATA ports and SATA ports start using different ops structures.
--- linux-2.6.20/drivers/ata/sata_promise.c.~1~ 2007-02-07 20:30:20.000000000 +0100
+++ linux-2.6.20/drivers/ata/sata_promise.c 2007-02-07 20:57:34.000000000 +0100
@@ -601,6 +601,13 @@ static void pdc_thaw(struct ata_port *ap
readl(mmio + PDC_CTLSTAT); /* flush */
}
+static int pdc_pre_reset(struct ata_port *ap)
+{
+ if (!sata_scr_valid(ap))
+ pdc_pata_cbl_detect(ap);
+ return ata_std_prereset(ap);
+}
+
Since it was a bug in the original patch, I just dropped it, waiting for
you to resend the whole thing. That keeps the git history much more clean.
I hope you dropped the 20619 new EH patch but applied this one.
Maybe the patch description was too terse given the broken 20619 patch:
This patch corrects TX2plus PATA in current #upstream. It's currently
unrelated to 20619 (since 20619 has its own ops and a ->phy_reset which
calls pdc_pata_cbl_detect()), but later when 20619 is converted to new EH,
it ensures that 20619 continues to do PATA cable detection.
The bug originated in the #promise-sata-pata branch, which added
TX2plus PATA support but didn't hook in any cable detection.
I failed to observe that omission when reworking #promise-sata-pata
into the form that got merged.
Ah, I misunderstood. I thought it was an incremental patch to your
new-EH patch, at first glance.
It is now in my queue.
Jeff
-
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
