Re: [PATCH] ata: pata_at91.c bugfix for initial_timing initialisation

[Igor Plyatov <plyatov@gmail.com>]

Dear Sergei and Eric,

It's so stupid from my side to send broken patch, but it happens :-)

Please, look at new my e-mails with subjects:
* "[PATCH v4 1/2] ata: pata_at91.c bugfix for initial_timing
initialisation"
* "[PATCH v4 2/2] ata: pata_at91.c bugfix for high master clock"

Best regards!
--
Igor Plyatov

> Hello.
> 
> Igor Plyatov wrote:
> 
> > The "struct ata_timing" must contain 10 members, but ".dmack_hold" member was
> > forgotten for "initial_timing" initialisation. This patch fixes such a problem.
> 
> > Signed-off-by: Igor Plyatov <plyatov@gmail.com>
> > ---
> >  drivers/ata/pata_at91.c |    5 +++--
> >  1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> > diff --git a/drivers/ata/pata_at91.c b/drivers/ata/pata_at91.c
> > index 0da0dcc..d1aaeb5 100644
> > --- a/drivers/ata/pata_at91.c
> > +++ b/drivers/ata/pata_at91.c
> > @@ -49,8 +49,9 @@ struct at91_ide_info {
> >  	void __iomem *alt_addr;
> >  };
> >  
> > -static const struct ata_timing initial_timing =
> > -	{XFER_PIO_0, 70, 290, 240, 600, 165, 150, 600, 0};
> > +static const struct ata_timing initial_timing = {
> > +	XFER_PIO_0, 70, 290, 240, 600, 165, 150, 600, 0
> > +};
> 
>     Frankly, I don't see any difference.
> 
> WBR, Sergei