I seem to have accidentally deleted your reply to this... On Friday 13 March 2009, Frans Pop wrote: > On Friday 13 March 2009, Mark Lord wrote: > > --- old/drivers/ata/sata_mv.c 2009-03-12 10:23:41.000000000 -0400 > > +++ new/drivers/ata/sata_mv.c 2009-03-13 09:03:47.000000000 -0400 > > @@ -1455,9 +1455,8 @@ > > struct ata_port *this_ap = host->ports[port]; > > struct mv_port_priv *pp = this_ap->private_data; > > > > - if (pp->pp_flags & MV_PP_FLAG_EDMA_EN) > > - if (pp->pp_flags & MV_PP_FLAG_NCQ_EN) > > - return; > > + if (pp->pp_flags & MV_PP_FLAG_NCQ_EN) > > + return; > > I expect that if NCQ is disabled using the method I've used so far, the > led behavior would still be correct, but... I did not mean I did not want to test the patch. Just wanted to verify that it was correct first. > The reason I included the test for both in my patches is that if DMA > gets disabled (which IIUC also disables NCQ) only the > MV_PP_FLAG_EDMA_EN flag gets unset in mv_stop_edma, and not the NCQ > flag (AFAICT). So that would result in blink mode remaining enabled > while it shouldn't be. I missed the fact that you now call mv_edma_cfg from mv_stop_edma, so the simplification is now indeed possible. Tested and everything still works. > I have so far not tested the led bahavior when DMA is disabled (not > even sure if that's possible for a running system). It seems that with libata-based drivers disabling dma is only possible at boot time and not dynamically, so this isn't possible anyway. I don't know if access errors could cause the driver to fall back to PIO, but I don't really want to test that :-) -- 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
