Re: [PATCH 1/2] libata: allow sata_sil24 to opt-out of tag ordered submission

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

 



On 01/17/2015 09:35 PM, Dan Williams wrote:

 >> Ronny reports: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=87101
 >>      "Since commit 8a4aeec8d "libata/ahci: accommodate tag ordered
 >>      controllers" the access to the harddisk on the first SATA-port is
 >>      failing on its first access. The access to the harddisk on the
 >>      second port is working normal.

 >>      When reverting the above commit, access to both harddisks is working
 >>      fine again."

 >> Maintain tag ordered submission as the default, but allow sata_sil24 to
 >> continue with the old behavior.

 >> Cc: <stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>>
 >> Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@xxxxxxxxxx <mailto:tj@xxxxxxxxxx>>
 >> Reported-by: Ronny Hegewald <Ronny.Hegewald@xxxxxxxxx>
 >> Signed-off-by: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@xxxxxxxxx>
 >> ---
 >>   drivers/ata/libata-core.c |    5 ++++-
 >>   drivers/ata/sata_sil24.c  |    2 +-
 >>   include/linux/libata.h    |    1 +
 >>   3 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

 >> diff --git a/drivers/ata/libata-core.c b/drivers/ata/libata-core.c
 >> index 5c84fb5c3372..e2085d4b5b93 100644
 >> --- a/drivers/ata/libata-core.c
 >> +++ b/drivers/ata/libata-core.c
 >> @@ -4748,7 +4748,10 @@ static struct ata_queued_cmd *ata_qc_new(struct
ata_port *ap)
 >>                 return NULL;
 >>
 >>         for (i = 0, tag = ap->last_tag + 1; i < max_queue; i++, tag++) {
 >> -               tag = tag < max_queue ? tag : 0;
 >> +               if (ap->flags & ATA_FLAG_LOWTAG)
 >> +                       tag = i;
 >> +               else
 >> +                       tag = tag < max_queue ? tag : 0;

 >    Ugh, this is clear abuse of the ?: operator... Why not simply:

 >                 else if (tag >= max_queue)
 >                         tag = 0;

"Abuse"!? Let's just call it "creative differences adding in a minimal quirk
while neglecting to refactor" ;-).

   In fact, the old code had the same abuse, I didn't notice that...

Sure, that's cleaner.

   Thanks. :-)

MBR, Sergei

--
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