From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff Garzik Subject: Re: [PATCH #upstream-fixes] sata_nv: use ata_pci_sff_activate_host() instead of ata_host_activate() Date: Fri, 14 May 2010 17:12:33 -0400 Message-ID: <4BEDBCC1.5080700@garzik.org> References: <4BED1C82.10102@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-yw0-f198.google.com ([209.85.211.198]:57456 "EHLO mail-yw0-f198.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1759240Ab0ENVMg (ORCPT ); Fri, 14 May 2010 17:12:36 -0400 Received: by ywh36 with SMTP id 36so1467358ywh.4 for ; Fri, 14 May 2010 14:12:35 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <4BED1C82.10102@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" , stable , Robert Hancock On 05/14/2010 05:48 AM, Tejun Heo wrote: > sata_nv was incorrectly using ata_host_activate() instead of > ata_pci_sff_activate_host() leading to IRQ assignment failure in > legacy mode. Fix it. > > Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo > Cc: Robert Hancock > Cc: stable@kernel.org > --- > drivers/ata/sata_nv.c | 3 +-- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-) > > Index: ata/drivers/ata/sata_nv.c > =================================================================== > --- ata.orig/drivers/ata/sata_nv.c > +++ ata/drivers/ata/sata_nv.c > @@ -2479,8 +2479,7 @@ static int nv_init_one(struct pci_dev *p > } > > pci_set_master(pdev); > - return ata_host_activate(host, pdev->irq, ipriv->irq_handler, > - IRQF_SHARED, ipriv->sht); > + return ata_pci_sff_activate_host(host, ipriv->irq_handler, ipriv->sht); hmmmm. I agree 100% with this patch, but is it a recent regression? At -rc7, we are trying hard to only include fixes for regressions. Around -rc1, I would stuff this into #upstream-fixes without hesitation. But now, I'm thinking #upstream. Jeff