From: Marc C <marc.ceeeee@gmail.com>
To: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/3] libata: Populate host-to-device FIS "auxiliary" field
Date: Fri, 09 Aug 2013 19:06:35 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5205A02B.6010208@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <52059FBF.7050303@gmail.com>
Hello,
> The auxiliary field is part of ata taskfile for all intents and purposes.
> FIS is the new command structure anyway and struct ata_taskfile proper
> should be able to describe the command with ata_queuedcmd providing
> the surrounding context. The argument that ata_taskfile shouldn't
> contain anything which wasn't in PATA taskfile is bogus as it already
> contains ATA_TFLAG_*.
> That's what make 'struct ata_taskfile' bogus. I'm going to remove
> 'protocol', 'flags', and 'ctl' fields from there (at least to save a space in
> 'struct ata_queued_cmd' because they're not used in 'result_tf').
>
>> So, please put the aux field into ata_taskfile. That's where it
>> belongs.
> Can't agree to that. I was going to make 'struct ata_taskfile' reflect the
> historical notion and remove from it all not belonging to that notion. Alas,
> libata has a bad history of mistreating the historical terms...
While I understand that some non-spec items don't belong in the taskfile struct (and should/will be cleaned up), I have to agree with Tejun regarding how the auxiliary field should be put in 'struct ata_taskfile'. If anything, the struct should represent ALL items that an ATA command will use as inputs. As of now, it's the stuff that's currently in the taskfile + this pesky new 'auxiliary' entry. (FYI, ATA-8 ACS refers to these items as"fields.")
>From what I can tell, there are a couple of places where a rigid definition of a taskfile truly matters, and that's:
1) SCSI to ATA passthrough
2) PATA
But in any event, sticking 'auxiliary' in doesn't matter from a compatibility standpoint, since only NCQ commands use the new field, and the above can't transport NCQ (yet in (1) case).
Tejun put it succinctly by stating:
> I mean, FIS is the new TF. We can rename ata_taskfile to
> ata_fis and map things the other way but that'd just be extra churn.
Ideally this would be the case, since the SATA FIS is a super-set of any/all fields defined in all ATA commands.
Regards,
Marc
next parent reply other threads:[~2013-08-10 2:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <52059FBF.7050303@gmail.com>
2013-08-10 2:06 ` Marc C [this message]
2013-08-09 4:49 [PATCH v3 0/3] Introduce new SATA queued commands Marc C
2013-08-09 4:49 ` [PATCH v3 1/3] libata: Populate host-to-device FIS "auxiliary" field Marc C
2013-08-09 14:03 ` Tejun Heo
2013-08-09 14:36 ` Sergei Shtylyov
2013-08-09 14:53 ` Tejun Heo
2013-08-09 21:39 ` Sergei Shtylyov
2013-08-09 21:51 ` Tejun Heo
2013-08-09 22:17 ` Sergei Shtylyov
2013-08-09 22:26 ` Tejun Heo
2013-08-10 21:59 ` Sergei Shtylyov
2013-08-12 13:58 ` Tejun Heo
2013-08-09 21:24 ` Sergei Shtylyov
2013-08-09 14:17 ` Sergei Shtylyov
2013-08-09 14:29 ` Sergei Shtylyov
2013-08-09 14:26 ` Sergei Shtylyov
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=5205A02B.6010208@gmail.com \
--to=marc.ceeeee@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-ide@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.