Hi,
On Friday 11 July 2008, Sergei Shtylyov wrote:
> Hello.
>
> Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
>
> >>>>> Index: b/drivers/ide/ide-iops.c
> >>>>> ===================================================================
> >>>>> --- a/drivers/ide/ide-iops.c
> >>>>> +++ b/drivers/ide/ide-iops.c
> >>>>> @@ -688,8 +688,7 @@ int ide_driveid_update(ide_drive_t *driv
> >>>>> */
> >>>>>
> >>>>> SELECT_MASK(drive, 1);
> >>>>> - if (IDE_CONTROL_REG)
> >>>>> - hwif->OUTB(drive->ctl,IDE_CONTROL_REG);
> >>>>> + ide_set_irq(drive, 1);
> >>>>>
> >>>> If we're going to execute the command using polling, isn't it logical to
> >>>> *disable* drive's interrupt instead of enabling it which this code is
> >>>> currently doing? This looks like it might work only for the drivers having
> >>>> the maskproc() method (of which hpt366.c is the only one that I've ever dealt
> >>>> with).
> >>>>
> >>> Yes, this needs fixing.
> >>>
> >> But should we honor drive->quirk_list here? What its different values
> >> mean? I'm seeing either 1 or 2 is used to decide whether to set nIEN or not...
> >>
> >
> > I did some research on ->quirk_list in the past but I couldn't exactly
> > figure it out. I also wasn't able to trace this code to its author
> > (not that I tried very hard)...
> >
> > Anyway my current findings/theories are the following:
> >
> > - the diff between hpt366 and pdc202xx_{new,old} quirky devices:
> >
> > --- hpt366.c 2008-04-12 22:03:54.000000000 +0200
> > +++ pdc202xx_new.c 2008-04-12 22:04:03.000000000 +0200
> > @@ -1,7 +1,11 @@
> > -static const char *quirk_drives[] = {
> > +static const char *pdc_quirk_drives[] = {
> > "QUANTUM FIREBALLlct08 08",
> > "QUANTUM FIREBALLP KA6.4",
> > + "QUANTUM FIREBALLP KA9.1",
> > "QUANTUM FIREBALLP LM20.4",
> > + "QUANTUM FIREBALLP KX13.6",
> > + "QUANTUM FIREBALLP KX20.5",
> > + "QUANTUM FIREBALLP KX27.3",
> > "QUANTUM FIREBALLP LM20.5",
> > NULL
> > };
> >
> > indicates that pdc202xx_{new,old} lists lack few devices that were added
> > only to hpt366 and need fixing
> >
>
> You surely meant to say the hpt366's list lacks few devices. ;-)
Yeah. :)
[...]
> > - we need to be a bit careful with hpt366's ->maskproc because it checks
> > for ->quirk_list internally
>
> ... and falls back to manipuating nIEN if not -- which is not its
> business.
>
> > (so either we need to mask/unmask for all devices on hpt366
> >
>
> I looked at that masking code and didn't like it at all -- since the
> interrupts are disabled for *both* channels as there's only *one* bit
> controlling that. :-/
:-/ indeed, I didn't know about this.
> So, masking interrupt for all drives is not really desirable...
Agreed.
> > or limit masking/unmasking to ->quirk_list on icside)
> >
>
> But you just said that in the icside driver this code controls some
> kind of IRQ routinng...
I later noticed that icside now also uses expansioncard_ops_t to do it
(like pata_icside which doesn't have ->maskproc alike) so ->maskproc may
no longer be needed for this.
> > - we should merge SELECT_MASK() with ide_set_irq() and consider skipping
> > ide_set_irq() for ->quirk_list devices
> >
>
> ... you mean where it's not already done?
We are going to mask the IRQ on controller side or enable/disable_irq()
anyway for ->quirk_list devices so we setting nIEN doesn't seem necessary?
Thanks,
Bart
--
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
