Re: [PATCH #upstream-fixes] libata: implement and use HORKAGE_NOSETXFER

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

 



> > What if there is a bridge, what if the controller needs SETXFER for
> > internal use (HPT PATA with on card SATA bridges) ?
> 
> The device is horridly broken. 

I know 8(

> 1. Don't do anything.  The device is broken everywhere.
> 
> 2. Skip SETXFER.  Any direct SATA connection to the device would work
>    fine.
> 
> 2. Ignore SETXFER timeout.  Probably would work for TF based
>    controllers but it's largely untested for sata controllers and the
>    behavior is likely undefined for more advanced controllers.

> So, #2 seems like the logical choice here.  If worst comes to worst

You have two #2's but I agree that providing its for this specific drive
and we document it carefully so people don't add it to stuff that is
wrong then your first #2 is probably safest.

Possibly  HORKAGE_NO_SETXFER_SATA and check word 93 ?


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

[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