From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tejun Heo Subject: Re: [PATCH #upstream] libata: implement dump_id force param Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2014 16:51:06 -0400 Message-ID: <20140701205106.GD12459@htj.dyndns.org> References: <4BF90A7F.80309@kernel.org> <4BFC6059.3080505@garzik.org> <56B984A8-0CA0-4FED-A3D2-6CDE82AA5FE4@usgs.gov> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from mail-qa0-f47.google.com ([209.85.216.47]:36283 "EHLO mail-qa0-f47.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751064AbaGAUvJ (ORCPT ); Tue, 1 Jul 2014 16:51:09 -0400 Received: by mail-qa0-f47.google.com with SMTP id hw13so8064928qab.20 for ; Tue, 01 Jul 2014 13:51:08 -0700 (PDT) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <56B984A8-0CA0-4FED-A3D2-6CDE82AA5FE4@usgs.gov> Sender: linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org To: Larry Baker Cc: Jeff Garzik , linux-ide@vger.kernel.org Hello, Larry. On Tue, Jul 01, 2014 at 11:51:54AM -0700, Larry Baker wrote: > I see what happened. Tejun sent me two sets of patches: one to > implement the driver dump_id kernel parameter and the other to fix > the problem with the buggy CF card. (It lies that it supports ATA > MULTI -- which is actually required by the standard!) Jeff only saw > the first set, which is what he applied. They are in the current > Linux source tree. What are missing are the patches to recover from > multi-block transfer failures by falling back to use single-block > transfers. Here's Tejun's e-mail to me with those patches (ready to > go?). I dug out the original patch. It looks like I was waiting for Tested-by. Has anyone tested the patch at the time? Thanks. -- tejun