From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff Garzik Subject: Re: [PATCH #upstream-fixes 2/3] ahci: clean up board IDs Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2010 19:04:08 -0400 Message-ID: <4BA15FE8.9010609@garzik.org> References: <4B98575C.5050508@kernel.org> <4B9857EA.5090101@kernel.org> <4BA11518.30500@garzik.org> <4BA15EA8.8000707@kernel.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mail-gw0-f46.google.com ([74.125.83.46]:63604 "EHLO mail-gw0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753122Ab0CQXEK (ORCPT ); Wed, 17 Mar 2010 19:04:10 -0400 Received: by gwaa12 with SMTP id a12so528079gwa.19 for ; Wed, 17 Mar 2010 16:04:10 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <4BA15EA8.8000707@kernel.org> Sender: linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org To: Tejun Heo Cc: "linux-ide@vger.kernel.org" , pchen@nvidia.com, kernel-bugzilla.20.drkshadow@spamgourmet.com On 03/17/2010 06:58 PM, Tejun Heo wrote: > Hello, > > On 03/18/2010 02:44 AM, Jeff Garzik wrote: >> It actually makes merging a lot more difficult, considering that libahci >> -- which includes large amounts of ahci code movement -- was committed >> to #upstream a week before this patch was posted. >> >> Because of libahci changes, I think patch #2 (this patch) and patch #3 >> are more appropriate for #upstream. >> >> The "(pdev->vendor != PCI_VENDOR_ID_NVIDIA)" may be overly broad, but >> it's not wrong for 2.6.34, IMO. > > Hmmm... the actual fix is in #3. I'll prep separate patches for > upstream and upstream-fixes. What does it fix, specifically? AFAICS, the patch changes the AHCI state from no FPDMA AA for all NVIDIA to some FPDMA AA for NVIDIA thus the current state of the code is not broken and in need of fixing, but merely overly conservative. Am I missing something? Jeff