Hello! On 9/30/23 10:15 PM, Ondrej Zary wrote: > There's a 'x' missing in 0x55 in pata_parport_devchk(), causing the > detection to always fail. Fix it. > > Signed-off-by: Ondrej Zary <linux@xxxxxxx> I think we need a Fixes: tag here... > --- > drivers/ata/pata_parport/pata_parport.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/ata/pata_parport/pata_parport.c b/drivers/ata/pata_parport/pata_parport.c > index 1af64d435d3c..258d189f42e5 100644 > --- a/drivers/ata/pata_parport/pata_parport.c > +++ b/drivers/ata/pata_parport/pata_parport.c > @@ -64,7 +64,7 @@ static bool pata_parport_devchk(struct ata_port *ap, unsigned int device) > pi->proto->write_regr(pi, 0, ATA_REG_NSECT, 0xaa); > pi->proto->write_regr(pi, 0, ATA_REG_LBAL, 0x55); > > - pi->proto->write_regr(pi, 0, ATA_REG_NSECT, 055); > + pi->proto->write_regr(pi, 0, ATA_REG_NSECT, 0x55); Oh, Gawd! How did this ever work?! :-/ This bug seems to predate the Big PARIDE move... > pi->proto->write_regr(pi, 0, ATA_REG_LBAL, 0xaa); > > nsect = pi->proto->read_regr(pi, 0, ATA_REG_NSECT); > MBR, Sergey
