From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/9] ide-disk: set_addressing() fixes Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2008 22:23:54 +0200 Message-ID: <200808252223.54795.bzolnier@gmail.com> References: <20080817171454.27943.37234.sendpatchset@localhost.localdomain> <20080817171501.27943.57473.sendpatchset@localhost.localdomain> <48B0850D.4000105@ru.mvista.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mu-out-0910.google.com ([209.85.134.186]:23392 "EHLO mu-out-0910.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754067AbYHYUcL (ORCPT ); Mon, 25 Aug 2008 16:32:11 -0400 Received: by mu-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id g7so320611muf.1 for ; Mon, 25 Aug 2008 13:32:11 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <48B0850D.4000105@ru.mvista.com> Content-Disposition: inline Sender: linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org To: Sergei Shtylyov Cc: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Saturday 23 August 2008, Sergei Shtylyov wrote: > Hello. > > Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote: > > > * Return -EIO if arg > 0 and LBA48 is unsupported. > > > > * No need to reset ->addressing. > > > > * Make ->addressing a single bit flag. > > > > Signed-off-by: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz > > > [...] > > Index: b/include/linux/ide.h > > =================================================================== > > --- a/include/linux/ide.h > > +++ b/include/linux/ide.h > > @@ -507,7 +507,7 @@ struct ide_drive_s { > > unsigned sleeping : 1; /* 1=sleeping & sleep field valid */ > > unsigned post_reset : 1; > > unsigned udma33_warned : 1; > > - unsigned addressing : 2; /* 0=28-bit, 1=48-bit, 2=48-bit doing 28-bit */ > > + unsigned addressing : 1; /* 0=28-bit, 1=48-bit */ > > unsigned wcache : 1; /* status of write cache */ > > unsigned nowerr : 1; /* used for ignoring ATA_DF */ > > > > Don't you want to get rid of things like: > > u8 lba48 = (drive->addressing == 1) ? 1 : 0; This was dealt with in "[PATCH 5/9] ide: add device flags" - since patch #5/9 was going to touch the code anyway and there were no benefits besides aesthetics in doing it in #2/9 I optimized the development process a bit...