Re: [RFC]hpt366/ide-probe reset drive on probe error.

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Sergei Shtylyov wrote:
Hello, I wrote:

+
+    reset = hwif->channel ? 0x80 : 0x40;

These HighPoint's "soft reset" (WTF does that mean I wonder?) bits are not the same between HPT366 and HPT370, so this code doesn't look right...

Ah, these "soft" reset bits correspond to PRST_/SRST_ signals which are really primary/secondary channel hard resets (RESET- signal). This explains everything; and this patch is a pure hack then.

+
+    pci_read_config_byte(dev, 0x59, &reg59h);
+    pci_write_config_byte(dev, 0x59, reg59h|reset);
+    pci_write_config_byte(dev, 0x59, reg59h);
+}
+
static void __devinit init_hwif_hpt366(ide_hwif_t *hwif)
{
    struct hpt_info *info    = hpt3xx_get_info(hwif->dev);
@@ -1406,6 +1431,7 @@ static const struct ide_port_ops hpt3xx_port_ops = {
    .set_pio_mode        = hpt3xx_set_pio_mode,
    .set_dma_mode        = hpt3xx_set_mode,
    .quirkproc        = hpt3xx_quirkproc,
+    .resetproc        = hpt3xx_reset,
    .maskproc        = hpt3xx_maskproc,
    .mdma_filter        = hpt3xx_mdma_filter,
    .udma_filter        = hpt3xx_udma_filter,
diff --git a/drivers/ide/ide-probe.c b/drivers/ide/ide-probe.c
index 7f264ed..09295b4 100644
--- a/drivers/ide/ide-probe.c
+++ b/drivers/ide/ide-probe.c
@@ -367,6 +367,7 @@ static int do_probe (ide_drive_t *drive, u8 cmd)
{
    ide_hwif_t *hwif = drive->hwif;
    const struct ide_tp_ops *tp_ops = hwif->tp_ops;
+    const struct ide_port_ops *port_ops = hwif->port_ops;
    u16 *id = drive->id;
    int rc;
    u8 present = !!(drive->dev_flags & IDE_DFLAG_PRESENT), stat;
@@ -427,9 +428,20 @@ static int do_probe (ide_drive_t *drive, u8 cmd)
        /* ensure drive IRQ is clear */
        stat = tp_ops->read_status(hwif);

-        if (rc == 1)
+        if (rc == 1) {
            printk(KERN_ERR "%s: no response (status = 0x%02x)\n",
                    drive->name, stat);
+
+            if (port_ops->resetproc) {
+                port_ops->resetproc(drive);
+                msleep(50);

Karl, why are you calling resetproc() without doing a reset? What this achieves?

To reset the drives, apparently. But it's not the function of resetproc(). We should try soft-reset instead.

Yes, to reset the drive that does not respond.

+            }
+            tp_ops->dev_select(drive);
+            msleep(50);
+            tp_ops->exec_command(hwif, ATA_CMD_DEV_RESET);
+            (void)ide_busy_sleep(hwif, WAIT_WORSTCASE, 0);
+            rc = ide_dev_read_id(drive, cmd, id);
+        }
    } else {
        /* not present or maybe ATAPI */
        rc = 3;

Since the current code in ide-probe.c looks like this:

        stat = tp_ops->read_status(hwif);

        if (stat == (ATA_BUSY | ATA_DRDY))
            return 4;

        if (rc == 1 && cmd == ATA_CMD_ID_ATAPI) {
            printk(KERN_ERR "%s: no response (status = 0x%02x), "
                    "resetting drive\n", drive->name, stat);
            msleep(50);
            tp_ops->dev_select(drive);
            msleep(50);
            tp_ops->exec_command(hwif, ATA_CMD_DEV_RESET);
            (void)ide_busy_sleep(hwif, WAIT_WORSTCASE, 0);
            rc = ide_dev_read_id(drive, cmd, id);
        }

        /* ensure drive IRQ is clear */
        stat = tp_ops->read_status(hwif);

        if (rc == 1)
            printk(KERN_ERR "%s: no response (status = 0x%02x)\n",
                    drive->name, stat);

I would really prefer fixing ATAPI case while we are at it
(+ this would also get rid of code duplication).

IOW:

- in patch #1 we would add ->resetproc call

   I would first like to hear an explanation of what it does...

I have to NAK this resetproc() addition. It tries to do things that it's not designed to do. We should instead try soft-resetting the channel...

Where should the soft reset be done, for this to not be called a hack? should it be in ide_port_ops->reset_poll?

Care to revise your patch?

   I see no point in "revising" this hack now...

Why not reset the drive if it does not respond? OK, you could blame this on a bugy board, or redboot that does not reset the drive on warm boot if it is busy.


--
Karl
--
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

[Index of Archives]     [Linux Filesystems]     [Linux SCSI]     [Linux RAID]     [Git]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Linux Newbie]     [Security]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]

  Powered by Linux