From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Sergei Shtylyov Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] libata: Add support for SEND/RECEIVE FPDMA QUEUED Date: Thu, 08 Aug 2013 23:03:55 +0400 Message-ID: <5203EB9B.3050206@cogentembedded.com> References: <1375946182-2831-1-git-send-email-marc.ceeeee@gmail.com> <1375946182-2831-2-git-send-email-marc.ceeeee@gmail.com> <5203DAD0.6040604@cogentembedded.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mail-lb0-f182.google.com ([209.85.217.182]:53022 "EHLO mail-lb0-f182.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752450Ab3HHTDu (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 Aug 2013 15:03:50 -0400 Received: by mail-lb0-f182.google.com with SMTP id v20so2757375lbc.27 for ; Thu, 08 Aug 2013 12:03:49 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org To: Marc C Cc: tj@kernel.org, linux-ide@vger.kernel.org Hello. On 08/08/2013 10:58 PM, Marc C wrote: >> How about non-AHCI FIS-based controllers? > Right. Since it's cost prohibitive for me to test exhaustively on > non-AHCI FIS-based controllers, do you think it would be acceptable to You can mark your patch as RFT (request for testing) in this case. > add a new ATA host flag... something like, ATA_FLAG_AHCI, which would > denote the controller as being AHCI-based? Then the flag could be used > to gate processing of READ/WRITE/SEND/RECEIVE FPDMA commands that have > the 'auxiliary' field set. Or, I could add a big fat warning print > whenever an ata_queued_cmd is passed to the drivers with a non-zero > 'auxiliary' value. I was rather thinking about a flag (ATA_FLAG_FIS_BASED, maybe) marking a controller as FIS-based, so that libata would know whether it can issue the new commands using the 'auxiliary' value. > Regards, > Marc WBR, Sergei