From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tejun Heo Subject: Re: Port Multiplier Patch 2.6.22.1 on Alpha Date: Sat, 08 Sep 2007 22:52:37 +0200 Message-ID: <46E30B95.10806@gmail.com> References: <46D638A3.2030704@23palmer.net> <46D64290.2010306@garzik.org> <46D64AAA.7090808@23palmer.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from rv-out-0910.google.com ([209.85.198.185]:51725 "EHLO rv-out-0910.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752200AbXIHUyN (ORCPT ); Sat, 8 Sep 2007 16:54:13 -0400 Received: by rv-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id k20so719435rvb for ; Sat, 08 Sep 2007 13:54:13 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <46D64AAA.7090808@23palmer.net> Sender: linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org To: Tom Evans Cc: Jeff Garzik , linux-ide@vger.kernel.org Tom Evans wrote: > In sil24_config_port, the writel's for /* zero error counters */ should > be writew's - they are 16bit control registers. > Only PORT_DECODE_ERR_THRESH and PORT_CRC_ERR_THRESH appear to be > unaligned, but why risk a stl when a stw (on platforms that support it) > can be used. That part of the code was taken verbatim from the Silicon Image sample driver, which I'm sure have been tested only on x86s. Those error threshold feature isn't really used and using writew's should be fine. Do things work better after changing to writew's? -- tejun