Hi, Robin.
2013-12-12 21:22, Robin H. Johnson:
On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 08:39:35AM -0500, Tejun Heo wrote:
Hello, Robin.
On Sat, Dec 07, 2013 at 04:56:27PM -0800, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
+ { "disable", .horkage_on = ATA_HORKAGE_DISABLE },
+ { "nodisable", .horkage_off = ATA_HORKAGE_DISABLE },
Given the current usage of ATA_HORKAGE_DISABLE, I don't think we need
"nodisable". Let's just add "disable" for now. Can you please update
the patch and resend?
Before I do so, I have two questions:
1.
Countering your nodisable comment, would it be valid to do:
libata.force=2:disable libata.force=2.02:nodisable
To disable all of port 2 except device 2?
I think that makes sense and I support having 'nodisable'.
2. One of my friends wondered if it would be worthwhile to add force
keywords for other HORKAGE bits, and if so, should the
ata_lflag/ata_link force bits also be presented?
I don't think so. Most of the other HORKAGEs are automatically
recognized and applied by the code. I think the only ones
which can cause trouble if not detected at first are the ones that are
currently in the list.
--
Regards,
Levente Kurusa
--
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
