On Wednesday 16 March 2022, Damien Le Moal wrote:
> On 3/16/22 20:28, Ondrej Zary wrote:
> > On Wednesday 16 March 2022, Sergey Shtylyov wrote:
> >> Hello!
> >>
> >> On 3/14/22 12:19 AM, Ondrej Zary wrote:
> >>
> >> [...]
> >>>>> The pata_parport is a libata-based replacement of the old PARIDE
> >>>>> subsystem - driver for parallel port IDE devices.
> >>>>> It uses the original paride low-level protocol drivers but does not
> >>>>> need the high-level drivers (pd, pcd, pf, pt, pg). The IDE devices
> >>>>> behind parallel port adapters are handled by the ATA layer.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> This will allow paride and its high-level drivers to be removed.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> paride and pata_parport are mutually exclusive because the compiled
> >>>>> protocol drivers are incompatible.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Tested with Imation SuperDisk LS-120 and HP C4381A (both use EPAT
> >>>>> chip).
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Note: EPP-32 mode is buggy in EPAT - and also in all other protocol
> >>>>> drivers - they don't handle non-multiple-of-4 block transfers
> >>>>> correctly. This causes problems with LS-120 drive.
> >>>>> There is also another bug in EPAT: EPP modes don't work unless a 4-bit
> >>>>> or 8-bit mode is used first (probably some initialization missing?).
> >>>>> Once the device is initialized, EPP works until power cycle.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> So after device power on, you have to:
> >>>>> echo "parport0 epat 0" >/sys/bus/pata_parport/new_device
> >>>>> echo pata_parport.0 >/sys/bus/pata_parport/delete_device
> >>>>> echo "parport0 epat 4" >/sys/bus/pata_parport/new_device
> >>>>> (autoprobe will initialize correctly as it tries the slowest modes
> >>>>> first but you'll get the broken EPP-32 mode)
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Ondrej Zary <linux@xxxxxxx>
> >>>> [...]
> >>>>> diff --git a/Documentation/admin-guide/blockdev/paride.rst b/Documentation/admin-guide/blockdev/paride.rst
> >>>>> index e1ce90af602a..e431a1ef41eb 100644
> >>>>> --- a/Documentation/admin-guide/blockdev/paride.rst
> >>>>> +++ b/Documentation/admin-guide/blockdev/paride.rst
> >>>> [...]
> >>>>> diff --git a/drivers/ata/pata_parport.c b/drivers/ata/pata_parport.c
> >>>>> new file mode 100644
> >>>>> index 000000000000..783764626a27
> >>>>> --- /dev/null
> >>>>> +++ b/drivers/ata/pata_parport.c
> >>>>> @@ -0,0 +1,819 @@
> >>>> [...]
> >>>>> +static void pata_parport_lost_interrupt(struct ata_port *ap)
> >>>>> +{
> >>>>> + u8 status;
> >>>>> + struct ata_queued_cmd *qc;
> >>>>> +
> >>>>> + /* Only one outstanding command per SFF channel */
> >>>>> + qc = ata_qc_from_tag(ap, ap->link.active_tag);
> >>>>> + /* We cannot lose an interrupt on a non-existent or polled command */
> >>>>> + if (!qc || qc->tf.flags & ATA_TFLAG_POLLING)
> >>>>> + return;
> >>>>> + /*
> >>>>> + * See if the controller thinks it is still busy - if so the command
> >>>>> + * isn't a lost IRQ but is still in progress
> >>>>> + */
> >>>>> + status = pata_parport_check_altstatus(ap);
> >>>>> + if (status & ATA_BUSY)
> >>>>> + return;
> >>>>> +
> >>>>> + /*
> >>>>> + * There was a command running, we are no longer busy and we have
> >>>>> + * no interrupt.
> >>>>> + */
> >>>>> + ata_port_warn(ap, "lost interrupt (Status 0x%x)\n", status);
> >>>>> + /* Run the host interrupt logic as if the interrupt had not been lost */
> >>>>> + ata_sff_port_intr(ap, qc);
> >>>>> +}
> >>>>
> >>>> As I said, ata_sff_lost_interrupt() could be used instead...
> >>>
> >>> It couldn't be used because it calls ata_sff_altstatus().
> >>
> >> And? That one used to call the sff_check_altstatus() method (which you define)
> >> even before my patch:
> >>
> >> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/dlemoal/libata.git/commit/?h=for-next&id=03c0e84f9c1e166d57d06b04497e11205f48e9a8
> >
> > OK, I was probably confused by ata_sff_check_status which uses ioread directly.
> >
> >> [...]
> >>>>> diff --git a/include/linux/pata_parport.h b/include/linux/pata_parport.h
> >>>>> new file mode 100644
> >>>>> index 000000000000..f1ba57bb319c
> >>>>> --- /dev/null
> >>>>> +++ b/include/linux/pata_parport.h
> >>>>> @@ -0,0 +1,108 @@
> >> [...]
> >>>>> +static inline u16 pi_swab16(char *b, int k)
> >>>>> +{
> >>>>> + union { u16 u; char t[2]; } r;
> >>>>> +
> >>>>> + r.t[0] = b[2 * k + 1]; r.t[1] = b[2 * k];
> >>>>> + return r.u;
> >>>>> +}
> >>>>> +
> >>>>> +static inline u32 pi_swab32(char *b, int k)
> >>>>> +{
> >>>>> + union { u32 u; char f[4]; } r;
> >>>>> +
> >>>>> + r.f[0] = b[4 * k + 1]; r.f[1] = b[4 * k];
> >>>>> + r.f[2] = b[4 * k + 3]; r.f[3] = b[4 * k + 2];
> >>>>> + return r.u;
> >>>>
> >>>> Hey, I was serious about swab{16|32}p()! Please don't use home grown byte
> >>>> swapping...
> >>>
> >>> This crap comes from old paride.h and we can't get rid of it without touching the protocol drivers
> >>
> >> I don't argue about the *inline*s themselves, just about the ineffective code inside them.
> >>
> >>> (comm.c and kbic.c). Maybe use something like:
> >>>
> >>> #define pi_swab16(char *b, int k) swab16p((u16 *)&b[2 * k])
> >>
> >>> but I'm not sure it's equivalent on a big-endian machine.
> >>
> >> These functions are endian-agnostic -- they swap always.
> >> If you only need to swab the bytes on big-endian machines, you should use cpu_to_le*() and/or
> >> le*_to_cpu()...
> >
> > swab16 swaps always but pi_swab16 does not on big-endian. It's probably a bug but doing the correct thing by accident. Other protocol drivers completely ignore endianness, probably because PARIDE was meant for x86 only.
>
> Fix that. ATA/IDE uses little endian. So all command & replies fields
> should be handled with put_unaligned_lexx()/get_unaligned_lexx(), or
> cpu_to_lexx() and lexx_to_cpu().
Fortunately, most of the code uses 8-bit only accesses (registers are 8-bit and also parport HW is mostly 8-bit). Only block reads/writes in EPP-16 and EPP-32 modes seem to be affected. I'll fix that later as I'm not touching protocol drivers now.
>
> >
> >> [...]
> >>
> >> MBR, Sergey
> >>
> >
> >
> >
>
>
--
Ondrej Zary
