From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tejun Heo Subject: Re: [PATCH 2.6.11-rc2 29/29] ide: make data_phase explicit in NO_DATA cases Date: Fri, 04 Feb 2005 09:59:22 +0900 Message-ID: <4202C8EA.7060802@home-tj.org> References: <20050202024017.GA621@htj.dyndns.org> <20050202031238.GN1187@htj.dyndns.org> <58cb370e050203094326ddfce8@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Received: from [211.58.254.17] ([211.58.254.17]:49283 "EHLO hemosu.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261850AbVBDA7Z (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 Feb 2005 19:59:25 -0500 In-Reply-To: <58cb370e050203094326ddfce8@mail.gmail.com> Sender: linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org To: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-ide@vger.kernel.org Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote: > On Wed, 2 Feb 2005 12:12:38 +0900, Tejun Heo wrote: > >>>29_ide_explicit_TASKFILE_NO_DATA.patch >>> >>> Make data_phase explicit in NO_DATA cases. >> >>Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo >> >>Index: linux-ide-export/drivers/ide/ide-disk.c >>=================================================================== >>--- linux-ide-export.orig/drivers/ide/ide-disk.c 2005-02-02 10:28:07.852771465 +0900 >>+++ linux-ide-export/drivers/ide/ide-disk.c 2005-02-02 10:28:08.121727827 +0900 >>@@ -300,6 +300,7 @@ static unsigned long idedisk_read_native >> args.tfRegister[IDE_SELECT_OFFSET] = 0x40; >> args.tfRegister[IDE_COMMAND_OFFSET] = WIN_READ_NATIVE_MAX; >> args.command_type = IDE_DRIVE_TASK_NO_DATA; >>+ args.data_phase = TASKFILE_NO_DATA; >> args.handler = &task_no_data_intr; > > > Could you add small helper to ide.h for doing this? > > static inline void ide_prep_no_data_cmd(ide_task_t *task) > { > task->command_type = IDE_DRIVE_TASK_NO_DATA; > task->data_phase = TASKFILE_NO_DATA; > task->handler = &task_no_data_intr; > } I am thinking about removing task->handler initialization. Such that it defaults to task_no_data_intr if data_phase == TASKFILE_NO_DATA and so on for all other data_phases. Currently, the same information is specified repeatedly. What do you think? > Also please move this patch earlier in the series > so I can merge it quickly. > > Thanks. Sure. -- tejun