Hello, I wrote:
I'm sorry, that was totally off base. I've misread this whole
paragraph in haste. :-<
The rest of my evening was wasted, sigh.
If it got the CF code fixed it wasn't a waste.
Do I understand rightly that the agreed things to do are
- redo the version check patch using the signed check as you suggested
and remove the changes to the CFA check from it
Yes, those shouldn't have been intermixed from the very start.
- make the CFA code check word 80 == 0 as a sanity check
That'll work unless we bump into a drive that does follow ATA in that
matter.
... because it also does specify the CFA feature set (minus the exotic
PIO/DMA modes). That's what you get for the closed standards. And yet there
seem to be CF drives in the wild that follow neither... :-/
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
