From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tejun Heo Subject: Re: [PATCH linux-2.6.13-rc3] Mod15Write quirk against v2.6.13 Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2005 06:44:45 +0900 Message-ID: <4308F5CD.7060001@gmail.com> References: <1121894035.4885.15.camel@drevil.aslab.com> <20050728141242.GA10010@htj.dyndns.org> <4308D3D0.50504@pobox.com> <4308E7F4.3000509@gmail.com> <4308EDB5.6060102@pobox.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from zproxy.gmail.com ([64.233.162.196]:51092 "EHLO zproxy.gmail.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751195AbVHUVov (ORCPT ); Sun, 21 Aug 2005 17:44:51 -0400 Received: by zproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id r28so632975nza for ; Sun, 21 Aug 2005 14:44:51 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <4308EDB5.6060102@pobox.com> Sender: linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org To: Jeff Garzik Cc: Michael Madore , linux-ide@vger.kernel.org, albertcc@tw.ibm.com Hello, Jeff. Jeff Garzik wrote: > Tejun Heo wrote: > >> Jeff Garzik wrote: >> >>> Tejun Heo wrote: >>> >>>> Also, Jeff, I know you're very busy, but what do you think about >>>> taking m15w workaround into ata tree? It's been around for a while >>>> now and I haven't received any complaints (except for this one) yet. >>>> The workaround is ugly but it surely helps and I'm willing to maintain >>>> it. > > >>> I think your mod15write solution is too messy to deal with long-term. >>> Maintenance burden is much lower on us without it. It's not too >>> difficult to simply avoid certain combinations of hardware. > > >> No problem, I'll maintain it out of tree. > > > You're welcome to maintain it as an independent branch of > libata-dev.git, if you would prefer. > I think I'll just keep it out of tree. I don't think many libata developers would be interested in m15w workaround. > >>> Note! As Carlos @ Silicon Image points out, the blacklist should >>> only apply to SiI 3112, not 3512/3114/etc. That's an open FIXME that >>> would benefit users. > > >> Cool, I'll submit a patch right away. > Can you please tell me which are affected and which are not? { 0x1095, 0x3112, PCI_ANY_ID, PCI_ANY_ID, 0, 0, sil_3112 }, { 0x1095, 0x0240, PCI_ANY_ID, PCI_ANY_ID, 0, 0, sil_3112 }, { 0x1095, 0x3512, PCI_ANY_ID, PCI_ANY_ID, 0, 0, sil_3112 }, { 0x1095, 0x3114, PCI_ANY_ID, PCI_ANY_ID, 0, 0, sil_3114 }, { 0x1002, 0x436e, PCI_ANY_ID, PCI_ANY_ID, 0, 0, sil_3112 }, { 0x1002, 0x4379, PCI_ANY_ID, PCI_ANY_ID, 0, 0, sil_3112 }, { 0x1002, 0x437a, PCI_ANY_ID, PCI_ANY_ID, 0, 0, sil_3112 }, Thanks. -- tejun