> I have explained everything in the prior mail. I hadn't expect you to > start the patch fencing. I don't see an explanation just points I queried. I shall draw the obvious conclusion from the fact you don't feel like providing one The logic is this ATA-3 or higher - that word has a defined meaning ATA < 3 that word should be 0x0000 pre ATA (EIDE) or head up backside implementations that would will be anything but usually 0x0000 or 0xFFFF We cannot test for ATA < 3 because there is no version bit for it (and in fact identify is optional which I need to fix at some point by permitting geometry passing so that support is at parity with old IDE) Therefore we want to check CFA signature -> CFA (good for CFA 1.1 and later devices using it) ATA >= 3 claimed - word is trustable bit is 0 or means CFA Yes the implementation is paranoid, but having done ten years working for a distro dealing with PC hardware in volume day in and day out I've yet to regret being paranoid. Assuming every piece of hardware sucks, nobody ever read the standard and every BIOS table is wrong is a staple part of writing a robust OS for the PC platform. Alan -- 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
