Re: [PATCH 2/3 v3] ide: add at91_ide driver

[Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <bzolnier@gmail.com>]

On Friday 13 March 2009, Sergei Shtylyov wrote:
> Hello.
> 
> Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
> 
> >>>>>>This is IDE host driver for AT91 (SAM9, CAP9, AT572D940HF) Static 
> >>>>>>Memory Controller with Compact Flash True IDE Mode logic.
> 
> >>>>>>Driver have to switch 8/16 bit bus width when accessing Task Tile or 
> >>>>>>Data
> >>>>>>Register. Moreover some extra things need to be done when setting 
> >>>>>>PIO mode.
> >>>>>>Only PIO mode is used, hardware have no DMA support. If interrupt 
> >>>>>>line is
> >>>>>>connected through GPIO extra quirk is needed to cope with fake 
> >>>>>>interrupts.
> 
> >>>>>>Signed-off-by: Stanislaw Gruszka <stf_xl@wp.pl>
> 
> >>>>>   This is prolly only me, but I afil to compile this driver with the 
> >>>>>current arch/arm/configs/at91sam9263ek_defconfig:
> 
> >>>>>  CC      drivers/ide/at91_ide.o
> >>>>>drivers/ide/at91_ide.c: In function ‘at91_ide_input_data’:
> >>>>>drivers/ide/at91_ide.c:159: error: implicit declaration of function 
> >>>>>‘__ide_mm_insw’
> >>>>>drivers/ide/at91_ide.c: In function ‘at91_ide_output_data’:
> >>>>>drivers/ide/at91_ide.c:174: error: implicit declaration of function 
> >>>>>‘__ide_mm_outsw’
> >>>>>drivers/ide/at91_ide.c: In function ‘at91_ide_tf_load’:
> >>>>>drivers/ide/at91_ide.c:192: error: ‘task’ undeclared (first use in 
> >>>>>this function)
> >>>>>drivers/ide/at91_ide.c:192: error: (Each undeclared identifier is 
> >>>>>reported only
> >>>>>once
> >>>>>drivers/ide/at91_ide.c:192: error: for each function it appears in.)
> >>>>>drivers/ide/at91_ide.c: At top level:
> >>>>>drivers/ide/at91_ide.c:303: warning: initialization from incompatible 
> >>>>>pointer type
> >>>>>drivers/ide/at91_ide.c:304: warning: initialization from incompatible 
> >>>>>pointer type
> >>>>>make[1]: *** [drivers/ide/at91_ide.o] Error 1
> >>>>>make: *** [drivers/ide/] Error 2
> 
> >>>>   Ah, it's only with pata-2.6 series applied. Bart, you clearly need 
> >>>>to include this driver to some of your patches...
> 
> > I did and asked people to test the final result (see my mail on merging
> > at91_ide)... unfortunately it seems like I missed few spots... :)
> 
> >>    Oops, got muddled in too many follow-ups.  :-) 
> >>>     Namely, ide-remove-ide_task_t-typedef.patch is incomplete...
> 
> > Was a bit more than that, I also needed to merge __ide_mm_* fixup below...
> 
> > [ Anyway please verify that I got it right this time, thanks! ]
> 
>     No, looks like you haven't again:
> 
> Applying patch ide-pass-command-instead-of-request-to-ide_pio_datablock.patch
> 1 out of 3 hunks FAILED
> missing header for unified diff at line 208 of patch
> The text leading up to this was:
> --------------------------
> |                       printk(KERN_ERR "%s: multimode not set!\n",
> |                                       drive->name);
> --------------------------
> No file to patch.  Skipping patch.
> 11 out of 11 hunks ignored
> Patch ide-pass-command-instead-of-request-to-ide_pio_datablock.patch does not 
> apply (enforce with -f)
> 
>     It appears that this patch has 2 hunks repeated twice now...

Strangely, the problem seems to be on your side this time as the patch
applies just fine here and AFAIK Stephen has successfully applied it to
linux-next (also md5sum of patch on kernel.org matches the local copy).

Did you forgot to re-sync the whole pata-2.6 tree by any chance?

Thanks,
Bart