From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tejun Heo Subject: Re: [Fwd: [BUG] sata_via doesn't detect anymore my disks (broken between rc1 and rc3)] Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2006 00:03:52 +0900 Message-ID: <44EF1158.1040507@gmail.com> References: <44E37BD4.8010709@pobox.com> <44E46E0E.4060703@gmail.com> <44EB32AD.1080305@gmail.com> <44EEEA29.1010008@gmail.com> <20060825135540.GE21866@htj.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from py-out-1112.google.com ([64.233.166.178]:10993 "EHLO py-out-1112.google.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S964821AbWHYPD6 (ORCPT ); Fri, 25 Aug 2006 11:03:58 -0400 Received: by py-out-1112.google.com with SMTP id n25so1274473pyg for ; Fri, 25 Aug 2006 08:03:57 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org To: Thierry Vignaud Cc: Jeff Garzik , "linux-ide@vger.kernel.org" Thierry Vignaud wrote: > Tejun Heo writes: > >>>> none of both these patches worked :-( >>> The second didn't work? But you said the following one liner worked. >>> >>> --- drivers/ata/sata_via.c.tv6 2006-08-20 16:37:41.000000000 +0200 >>> +++ drivers/ata/sata_via.c 2006-08-20 17:20:23.000000000 +0200 >>> @@ -244,7 +244,7 @@ >>> >>> static void vt6421_error_handler(struct ata_port *ap) >>> { >>> - return ata_bmdma_drive_eh(ap, ata_std_prereset, NULL, >>> + return ata_bmdma_drive_eh(ap, vt6420_prereset, ata_std_softreset, >>> sata_std_hardreset, ata_std_postreset); >>> } >>> >>> The second patch is essentially identical to what you did the one liner. >>> Can you please check it once more? I'll prepare old-sequence >>> hardreset in the meantime. >> Okay, here's the old-sequence hardreset patch. This should have the >> highest chance of working. This patch should be applied on top of the >> vt6420 patch. > > On top of which patch? > I just tried to apply it on top of: > - your last week patch > - your two patches of this week > > and it does *not* apply on top of anyone... Arghh... Sorry. I sent the wrong version. This patch is against #upstream while I should have sent the one against #upstream-fixes. > Couldn't you either check first your patch or (better) just send a > patch against vanilla 2.6.18-rc4-mm2? I've attached whole sata_via.c to the other mail. I think that should do the trick. thanks. -- tejun