Re: [patch for 2.6.24? 1/1] libata: correct handling of TSS DVD

Re: [patch for 2.6.24? 1/1] libata: correct handling of TSS DVD

[Jeff Garzik]

akpm@linux-foundation.org wrote:
> From: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
> 
> Devices that misreport the validity bit for word 93 look like SATA.  If
> they are on the blacklist then we must not test for SATA but assume 40 wire
> in the 40 wire case (The TSSCorp reports 80 wire on SATA it seems!)
> 
> Signed-off-by: Alan Cox <alan@redhat.com>
> Cc: Tejun Heo <htejun@gmail.com>
> Cc: Jeff Garzik <jeff@garzik.org>
> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
> ---
> 
>  include/linux/ata.h |    2 --
>  1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff -puN include/linux/ata.h~libata-correct-handling-of-tss-dvd include/linux/ata.h
> --- a/include/linux/ata.h~libata-correct-handling-of-tss-dvd
> +++ a/include/linux/ata.h
> @@ -554,8 +554,6 @@ static inline int ata_drive_40wire(const
>  
>  static inline int ata_drive_40wire_relaxed(const u16 *dev_id)
>  {
> -	if (ata_id_is_sata(dev_id))
> -		return 0;	/* SATA */
>  	if ((dev_id[93] & 0x2000) == 0x2000)
>  		return 0;	/* 80 wire */
>  	return 1;


Alan, is this .24 material?

There were a lot of different threads and BZs about this one device, and 
I want to triple-check that multiple fixes are not being applied 
independently for the same problem.

	Jeff

Re: [patch for 2.6.24? 1/1] libata: correct handling of TSS DVD

[Alan Cox]

On Tue, Jan 15, 2008 at 03:52:09PM -0500, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> > {
> >-	if (ata_id_is_sata(dev_id))
> >-		return 0;	/* SATA */
> > 	if ((dev_id[93] & 0x2000) == 0x2000)
> > 		return 0;	/* 80 wire */
> > 	return 1;
> 
> 
> Alan, is this .24 material?
> 
> There were a lot of different threads and BZs about this one device, and 
> I want to triple-check that multiple fixes are not being applied 
> independently for the same problem.

Yes.

Without this fix a TSScorp CD-ROM on 40 wire ata reports itself as SATA

Alan