Hello, I wrote:
When checking for CFA feature set support, ata_id_is_cfa() tests bit 2 in word 82 of the identify data instead the word 83. It also checks the ATA revision in the word 80 instead of usual validity check for the words 82-83 -- word 83 bit 14 set, bit 15 cleared. Signed-off-by: Sergei Shtylyov <sshtylyov@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> --- I'm not sure who should queue this patch... it's against Linus' tree. include/linux/ata.h | 5 ++--- 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) Index: linux-2.6/include/linux/ata.h =================================================================== --- linux-2.6.orig/include/linux/ata.h +++ linux-2.6/include/linux/ata.h @@ -734,9 +734,8 @@ static inline int ata_id_is_cfa(const u1 if (id[ATA_ID_CONFIG] == 0x848A) /* Standard CF */ return 1; /* Could be CF hiding as standard ATA */ - if (ata_id_major_version(id) >= 3 && - id[ATA_ID_COMMAND_SET_1] != 0xFFFF && - (id[ATA_ID_COMMAND_SET_1] & (1 << 2))) + if ((id[ATA_ID_COMMAND_SET_2] & 0xC000) == 0x4000 && + (id[ATA_ID_COMMAND_SET_2] & (1 << 2))) return 1; return 0; }
Jeff, Bart, I've changed my mind about recasting this patch as Alan has requested, as I do consider it correct now. The version check should be unnecessary since I'm adding the validity bits check (hte fact that ata_id_major_complex() is quite cumbesome way of checking the minumum revision # -- this can be done with a single comparison instead of the bit scan). Note that words 64-127 were marked reserved, and must be set to 0 since ATA-1. Have your say please -- do I still need to recast the patch?
MBR, Sergei -- 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
