From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tejun Heo Subject: Re: [PATCH] libata: implement ata_wait_after_reset() Date: Tue, 29 May 2007 09:33:37 +0200 Message-ID: <465BD751.8000708@gmail.com> References: <20070510072005.GA27316@linux-sh.org> <464301D3.5060306@gmail.com> <464307CC.40701@gmail.com> <20070510072005.GA27316@linux-sh.org> <464301D3.5060306@gmail.com> <20070510124645.GA18534@linux-sh.org> <4643196B.7070806@gmail.com> <20070511005217.GA23186@linux-sh.org> <464439C8.7090309@gmail.com> <20070512034928.GB29259@linux-sh.org> <20070516003002.GA18863@linux-sh.org> <464B3505.20004@gmail.com> <465B8277.9010001@garzik.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from nz-out-0506.google.com ([64.233.162.226]:52519 "EHLO nz-out-0506.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754345AbXE2Hew (ORCPT ); Tue, 29 May 2007 03:34:52 -0400 Received: by nz-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id n1so1135707nzf for ; Tue, 29 May 2007 00:34:52 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <465B8277.9010001@garzik.org> Sender: linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org To: Jeff Garzik Cc: Paul Mundt , linux-ide@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, garyhade@us.ibm.com Jeff Garzik wrote: > Tejun Heo wrote: >> - msleep(150); >> + /* wait a while before checking status */ >> + ata_wait_after_reset(ap, deadline); > [...] >> - msleep(150); >> + /* wait a while before checking status */ >> + ata_wait_after_reset(ap, deadline); >> >> /* Before we perform post reset processing we want to see if >> * the bus shows 0xFF because the odd clown forgets the D7 >> @@ -3543,8 +3583,8 @@ int sata_std_hardreset(struct ata_port * >> return 0; >> } >> >> - /* wait a while before checking status, see SRST for more info */ >> - msleep(150); >> + /* wait a while before checking status */ >> + ata_wait_after_reset(ap, deadline); >> >> rc = ata_wait_ready(ap, deadline); > [...] >> - msleep(150); >> + /* wait a while before checking status */ >> + ata_wait_after_reset(ap, deadline); >> >> /* Before we perform post reset processing we want to see if >> * the bus shows 0xFF because the odd clown forgets the D7 >> Index: work/drivers/ata/sata_inic162x.c >> =================================================================== >> --- work.orig/drivers/ata/sata_inic162x.c >> +++ work/drivers/ata/sata_inic162x.c >> @@ -446,7 +446,7 @@ static int inic_hardreset(struct ata_por >> struct ata_taskfile tf; >> >> /* wait a while before checking status */ >> - msleep(150); >> + ata_wait_after_reset(ap, deadline); >> >> rc = ata_wait_ready(ap, deadline); > [...] > > The main thing that bothers me is not the increase in delay, but the > fact that this create converts a delay/Status-poll sequence into a > delay/Status-poll/Status-poll sequence. > > ata_wait_after_reset() immediately before ata_wait_ready() seems highly > redundant. Why not just poll Status once? I was trying to minimize code disturbance around reset such that ata_wait_after_reset() can be drop-in replacement for msleep(150). This was for two reasons 1. as this patch was to fix regression I didn't want to introduce a lot of change into -rcX and 2. I was lazy. :-) As dont-consider-0xff-as-port-empty-if-sstatus-available patch fixes the regression nicely, I think we can delay this to 2.6.23. I'll merge ata_wait_after_reset() into ata_wait_ready() (or the other way around). Thanks. -- tejun