From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S267345AbUG1RSh (ORCPT ); Wed, 28 Jul 2004 13:18:37 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S267346AbUG1RSh (ORCPT ); Wed, 28 Jul 2004 13:18:37 -0400 Received: from parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk ([195.92.249.252]:33761 "EHLO www.linux.org.uk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S267345AbUG1RPW (ORCPT ); Wed, 28 Jul 2004 13:15:22 -0400 Message-ID: <4107DF1D.4070405@pobox.com> Date: Wed, 28 Jul 2004 13:15:09 -0400 From: Jeff Garzik User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.6) Gecko/20040510 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Andrew Chew CC: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, B.Zolnierkiewicz@elka.pw.edu.pl Subject: Re: [PATCH 2.6.8-rc2] include/linux/ata.h References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Andrew Chew wrote: > The macros ata_id_has_lba() and ata_id_has_dma() seem to have their bits > reversed. LBA support is bit 9 of word 49 in the identify page, whereas > DMA support is bit 8 of word 49 in the identify page. > > > --- ata.original.h 2004-07-19 17:49:26.000000000 -0700 > +++ ata.h 2004-07-19 17:49:05.000000000 -0700 > @@ -209,8 +209,8 @@ > #define ata_id_has_lba48(dev) ((dev)->id[83] & (1 << 10)) > #define ata_id_has_wcache(dev) ((dev)->id[82] & (1 << 5)) > #define ata_id_has_pm(dev) ((dev)->id[82] & (1 << 3)) > -#define ata_id_has_lba(dev) ((dev)->id[49] & (1 << 8)) > -#define ata_id_has_dma(dev) ((dev)->id[49] & (1 << 9)) > +#define ata_id_has_lba(dev) ((dev)->id[49] & (1 << 9)) > +#define ata_id_has_dma(dev) ((dev)->id[49] & (1 << 8)) > #define ata_id_removeable(dev) ((dev)->id[0] & (1 << 7)) > #define ata_id_u32(dev,n) \ > (((u32) (dev)->id[(n) + 1] << 16) | ((u32) (dev)->id[(n)])) Patch looks good, but please submit patches generated from the base of the kernel tree, so that "patch -sp1 < patch" successfully applies your patch. I am applying this patch manually... Jeff