From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "zhao, forrest" Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/6] The definition of ahci_port_standby() and ahci_port_spinup() Date: Fri, 02 Jun 2006 17:01:53 +0800 Message-ID: <1149238913.29552.7.camel@forrest26.sh.intel.com> References: <1149234328.13451.56.camel@forrest26.sh.intel.com> <447FF381.4060707@suse.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mga03.intel.com ([143.182.124.21]:26160 "EHLO azsmga101-1.ch.intel.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751349AbWFBJNl (ORCPT ); Fri, 2 Jun 2006 05:13:41 -0400 In-Reply-To: <447FF381.4060707@suse.de> Sender: linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org To: Hannes Reinecke Cc: jeff@garzik.org, axboe@suse.de, htejun@gmail.com, jeremy@goop.org, lkml@rtr.ca, linux-ide@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 2006-06-02 at 10:14 +0200, Hannes Reinecke wrote: > Did you actually test with staggered-spinup and/or cold-presence > detection? I just added them per spec but never got a chance to test > them here. We have no mobile platform in our lab, which support staggered-spinup or cold presence detection. I would test it when the newest chipset is available. > And: it might be an idea to rename the HOST_CAP bits to be consistent > with those printed during initialisation. It's bad enough as it is (ie > the spec uses different abbrevs than the implementation), but we should > try to be consistent within the implementation. > I would rename them to HOST_CAP_STAG and HOST_CAP_SLUM. Agree. When reading code, I need to translate the MACRO into the abbrevs in spec to understand the meaning. > Add slumber mode: libata-core used to issue a port reset with an > implicit SLUMBER/PARTIAL mode disable. So after a reset we might not be > able to put the device into SLUMBER mode even if supported. > What was the reasoning for this? I have the same question. Maybe the original author of libata-core.c can help answer it.