From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tejun Heo Subject: Re: [PATCH 2.6.22-rc7 2/3] libata: implement HORKAGE_SETXFER Date: Thu, 05 Jul 2007 21:22:44 +0900 Message-ID: <468CE294.2080705@gmail.com> References: <20070705043127.GX29122@htj.dyndns.org> <20070705043501.GY29122@htj.dyndns.org> <20070705132706.743d18d8@the-village.bc.nu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from wa-out-1112.google.com ([209.85.146.177]:54673 "EHLO wa-out-1112.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756842AbXGEMWw (ORCPT ); Thu, 5 Jul 2007 08:22:52 -0400 Received: by wa-out-1112.google.com with SMTP id v27so3588045wah for ; Thu, 05 Jul 2007 05:22:49 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20070705132706.743d18d8@the-village.bc.nu> Sender: linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org To: Alan Cox Cc: Jeff Garzik , linux-ide@vger.kernel.org Alan Cox wrote: > On Thu, 5 Jul 2007 13:35:01 +0900 > Tejun Heo wrote: > >> Make CFA SETXFER failure handling into HORKAGE. This will be used to >> allow other cases to ignore SETXFER failure. > > NAK > >> + /* Old CFA may refuse SETFEATURES_XFER, which >> + * is just fine >> + */ >> + if (!(xfer_mask & ~ATA_MASK_PIO)) >> + dev->horkage |= ATA_HORKAGE_SETXFER; >> + } else > > This is specifically done for PIO. An XFER failure for non PIO modes is a > serious failure and happens in the real world sometimes. Hmmm... That's what "if (!(xfer_mask & ~ATA_MASK_PIO))" test was for. Or is it not enough? -- tejun