EH progress summary

EH progress summary

[Tejun Heo]

Hello, Jeff.

I think we're half-way through the EH changes. New reset mechanism and 
most of config reorganization are in tree. Currently, the patches which 
are waiting for your review are...

[1] libata: rename ata_dev_id_[c_]string()
[2] libata: reorganize ata_dev_identify() (7 patches)
[3] libata: implement and use ata_dev_revalidate() (4 patches)

Once these revalidation changes make into tree, I'll submit 
ata_set_mode() changes (I've submitted the first patchset of this but 
Alan had a valid objection. I agreed and dropped that one.[4])

After ata_set_mode() changes are complete, the real EH changes will be 
submitted including error recording (to determine whether speed down is 
necessary) and all the recovery actions. I haven't splitted these yet 
but I guess it will be three or four patchsets.

And after that, Jens' NCQ work can be integrated over it. The code 
required to implement NCQ is actually quite small.  It will probably 
take only one patchset of about three to five patches.

So, this is where we stand. I hope we can get new EH up and working soon.

Thanks a lot. :-)

-- 
tejun

[1] http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.ide/7997
[2] http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.ide/8048
[3] http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.ide/8050
[4] http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.ide/8054

Re: EH progress summary

[Albert Lee]

Hi Tejun:
> 
> I think we're half-way through the EH changes. New reset mechanism and
> most of config reorganization are in tree. Currently, the patches which
> are waiting for your review are...
> 
> [1] libata: rename ata_dev_id_[c_]string()
> [2] libata: reorganize ata_dev_identify() (7 patches)
> [3] libata: implement and use ata_dev_revalidate() (4 patches)
> 
> Once these revalidation changes make into tree, I'll submit
> ata_set_mode() changes (I've submitted the first patchset of this but
> Alan had a valid objection. I agreed and dropped that one.[4])
> 
> After ata_set_mode() changes are complete, the real EH changes will be
> submitted including error recording (to determine whether speed down is
> necessary) and all the recovery actions. 

Will PATA speed down be supported?
e.g. udma133 => udma100 => udma66 => udma33 => pio ...


> I haven't splitted these yet
> but I guess it will be three or four patchsets.
> 
> And after that, Jens' NCQ work can be integrated over it. The code
> required to implement NCQ is actually quite small.  It will probably
> take only one patchset of about three to five patches.
> 
> So, this is where we stand. I hope we can get new EH up and working soon.
> 
> 

Albert

Re: EH progress summary

[Tejun Heo]

Albert Lee wrote:
> Hi Tejun:
> 
>>I think we're half-way through the EH changes. New reset mechanism and
>>most of config reorganization are in tree. Currently, the patches which
>>are waiting for your review are...
>>
>>[1] libata: rename ata_dev_id_[c_]string()
>>[2] libata: reorganize ata_dev_identify() (7 patches)
>>[3] libata: implement and use ata_dev_revalidate() (4 patches)
>>
>>Once these revalidation changes make into tree, I'll submit
>>ata_set_mode() changes (I've submitted the first patchset of this but
>>Alan had a valid objection. I agreed and dropped that one.[4])
>>
>>After ata_set_mode() changes are complete, the real EH changes will be
>>submitted including error recording (to determine whether speed down is
>>necessary) and all the recovery actions. 
> 
> 
> Will PATA speed down be supported?
> e.g. udma133 => udma100 => udma66 => udma33 => pio ...
> 

Yeap, sure.

-- 
tejun

Re: EH progress summary

[Albert Lee]

Tejun Heo wrote:
> Albert Lee wrote:
> 
>> Hi Tejun:
>>
>>> I think we're half-way through the EH changes. New reset mechanism and
>>> most of config reorganization are in tree. Currently, the patches which
>>> are waiting for your review are...
>>>
>>> [1] libata: rename ata_dev_id_[c_]string()
>>> [2] libata: reorganize ata_dev_identify() (7 patches)
>>> [3] libata: implement and use ata_dev_revalidate() (4 patches)
>>>
>>> Once these revalidation changes make into tree, I'll submit
>>> ata_set_mode() changes (I've submitted the first patchset of this but
>>> Alan had a valid objection. I agreed and dropped that one.[4])
>>>
>>> After ata_set_mode() changes are complete, the real EH changes will be
>>> submitted including error recording (to determine whether speed down is
>>> necessary) and all the recovery actions. 
>>
>>
>>
>> Will PATA speed down be supported?
>> e.g. udma133 => udma100 => udma66 => udma33 => pio ...
>>
> 
> Yeap, sure.
> 

That's great, thanks! :)

Albert