Re: libata NCQ implementation questions

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Tejun Heo writes:
...
 > > 4. What are these "internal commands" that map to ATA_TAG_INTERNAL?
 > >    Are they NCQ or not?
 > >    Does the existence of ATA_TAG_INTERNAL limit queue depth for NCQ?
 > 
 > Yeah, it reserves tag 31 for EH commands.  We might as well use tag 32 
 > for EH commands and let LLD map it to whatever tag it can use for EH 
 > commands but Jeff didn't like using all the tags as it makes 0xffffffff 
 > a valid status value.
 > 
 > Note that depending on LLD implementation, you might want to remap tag 
 > 31 to different hardware tag.  sata_sil24 does this mainly because it 
 > made polled execution implementation easier.

I think I'll remap them to 0 too. The tag ends up in a field
in the ATA packet header that's overloaded for NCQ tags and
non-NCQ packet "delay sequence ids". So far sata_promise has
always set this field to 0, and set up seqid #0 as /dev/null,
so I'm not comfortable allowing non-zero values into this field
for non-NCQ packets.

Thanks,

/Mikael
--
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

[Index of Archives]     [Linux Filesystems]     [Linux SCSI]     [Linux RAID]     [Git]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Linux Newbie]     [Security]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]

  Powered by Linux