[PATCH]: libata-core: Add support for ATA_HORKAGE_DIAGNOSTIC

[PATCH]: libata-core: Add support for ATA_HORKAGE_DIAGNOSTIC

[Alan Cox]

If we find the device has broken diagnostics then don't report this if we
expect it to. Needed for the Gigabyte i-RAM.

Signed-off-by: Alan Cox <alan@redhat.com>

diff -u --new-file --recursive --exclude-from /usr/src/exclude linux.vanilla-2.6.21-rc3-mm2/drivers/ata/libata-core.c linux-2.6.21-rc3-mm2/drivers/ata/libata-core.c
--- linux.vanilla-2.6.21-rc3-mm2/drivers/ata/libata-core.c	2007-03-08 16:01:10.000000000 +0000
+++ linux-2.6.21-rc3-mm2/drivers/ata/libata-core.c	2007-03-08 16:02:52.000000000 +0000
@@ -1751,7 +1765,7 @@
 		/* Let the user know. We don't want to disallow opens for
 		   rescue purposes, or in case the vendor is just a blithering
 		   idiot */
-                if (print_info) {
+                if (print_info && !(ata_device_blacklisted(dev) & ATA_HORKAGE_DIAGNOSTIC)) {
 			ata_dev_printk(dev, KERN_WARNING,
 "Drive reports diagnostics failure. This may indicate a drive\n");
 			ata_dev_printk(dev, KERN_WARNING,

Re: [PATCH]: libata-core: Add support for ATA_HORKAGE_DIAGNOSTIC

[Jeff Garzik]

Alan Cox wrote:
> If we find the device has broken diagnostics then don't report this if we
> expect it to. Needed for the Gigabyte i-RAM.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Alan Cox <alan@redhat.com>
> 
> diff -u --new-file --recursive --exclude-from /usr/src/exclude linux.vanilla-2.6.21-rc3-mm2/drivers/ata/libata-core.c linux-2.6.21-rc3-mm2/drivers/ata/libata-core.c
> --- linux.vanilla-2.6.21-rc3-mm2/drivers/ata/libata-core.c	2007-03-08 16:01:10.000000000 +0000
> +++ linux-2.6.21-rc3-mm2/drivers/ata/libata-core.c	2007-03-08 16:02:52.000000000 +0000
> @@ -1751,7 +1765,7 @@
>  		/* Let the user know. We don't want to disallow opens for
>  		   rescue purposes, or in case the vendor is just a blithering
>  		   idiot */
> -                if (print_info) {
> +                if (print_info && !(ata_device_blacklisted(dev) & ATA_HORKAGE_DIAGNOSTIC)) {
>  			ata_dev_printk(dev, KERN_WARNING,
>  "Drive reports diagnostics failure. This may indicate a drive\n");
>  			ata_dev_printk(dev, KERN_WARNING,

I don't understand this one at all.

The original point of the message was to poke people so that they poke 
their vendors into fixing the firmware, which is indeed non-spec.  I 
would rather not silence a "your device is operating out-of-spec" warning.

	Jeff

Re: [PATCH]: libata-core: Add support for ATA_HORKAGE_DIAGNOSTIC

[Alan Cox]

> > -                if (print_info) {
> > +                if (print_info && !(ata_device_blacklisted(dev) & ATA_HORKAGE_DIAGNOSTIC)) {
> >  			ata_dev_printk(dev, KERN_WARNING,
> >  "Drive reports diagnostics failure. This may indicate a drive\n");
> >  			ata_dev_printk(dev, KERN_WARNING,
> 
> I don't understand this one at all.
> 
> The original point of the message was to poke people so that they poke 
> their vendors into fixing the firmware, which is indeed non-spec.  I 
> would rather not silence a "your device is operating out-of-spec" warning.

The moment it goes near a business oriented distribution this becomes a
problem because the flack all lands on either the system vendor or the OS
product vendor both of whom will simply delete the check. At least this
way it stays in for cases that actually matter.

Alan

Re: [PATCH]: libata-core: Add support for ATA_HORKAGE_DIAGNOSTIC

[Jeff Garzik]

Alan Cox wrote:
>>> -                if (print_info) {
>>> +                if (print_info && !(ata_device_blacklisted(dev) & ATA_HORKAGE_DIAGNOSTIC)) {
>>>  			ata_dev_printk(dev, KERN_WARNING,
>>>  "Drive reports diagnostics failure. This may indicate a drive\n");
>>>  			ata_dev_printk(dev, KERN_WARNING,
>> I don't understand this one at all.
>>
>> The original point of the message was to poke people so that they poke 
>> their vendors into fixing the firmware, which is indeed non-spec.  I 
>> would rather not silence a "your device is operating out-of-spec" warning.
> 
> The moment it goes near a business oriented distribution this becomes a
> problem because the flack all lands on either the system vendor or the OS
> product vendor both of whom will simply delete the check. At least this
> way it stays in for cases that actually matter.

Maybe, but it's also possible the vendor and user will know that their 
device is operating out-of-spec.

libata will default to the more-information setting, and distros are 
free to change it if they wish.

	Jeff