Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] libata: Add support for SEND/RECEIVE FPDMA QUEUED

[Sergei Shtylyov <sergei.shtylyov@cogentembedded.com>]

On 08/08/2013 11:03 PM, Sergei Shtylyov 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.

    Perhaps we can test for the presence of one of the sff_*() methods as a 
negative condition for the controller being FIS-based.

>> Regards,
>> Marc

WBR, Sergei