On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 09:36:55PM +0100, Levente Kurusa wrote: > > 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. His logic was thinking that it will aid debugging/testing on new buggy devices if the options are available at boot. I'd think of the following as candidates for that: ATA_HORKAGE_NODMA ATA_HORKAGE_MAX_SEC_128 ATA_HORKAGE_DIAGNOSTIC ATA_HORKAGE_BROKEN_HPA ATA_HORKAGE_DISABLE ATA_HORKAGE_HPA_SIZE ATA_HORKAGE_IVB ATA_HORKAGE_STUCK_ERR (only set by code presently, not by blacklist) ATA_HORKAGE_BRIDGE_OK ATA_HORKAGE_ATAPI_MOD16_DMA ATA_HORKAGE_NOSETXFER ATA_HORKAGE_MAX_SEC_LBA48 -- Robin Hugh Johnson Gentoo Linux: Developer, Infrastructure Lead E-Mail : robbat2@xxxxxxxxxx GnuPG FP : 11ACBA4F 4778E3F6 E4EDF38E B27B944E 34884E85 -- 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
