From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Robert Hancock Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] sata_nv: don't use legacy DMA in ADMA mode Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2007 18:59:04 -0600 Message-ID: <474382D8.1050507@shaw.ca> References: <473A7628.3010907@shaw.ca> <473BA447.6090909@gmail.com> <473BA4D8.508@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from idcmail-mo1so.shaw.ca ([24.71.223.10]:34441 "EHLO pd3mo1so.prod.shaw.ca" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752910AbXKUA7l (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 Nov 2007 19:59:41 -0500 In-reply-to: <473BA4D8.508@gmail.com> Sender: linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org To: Tejun Heo Cc: linux-kernel , ide , Jeff Garzik Tejun Heo wrote: > Tejun Heo wrote: >> If so, can you please add that switching into register mode is okay as >> long as there's no other ADMA commands in flight and add >> WARN_ON((qc->flags & ATA_QCFLAG_RESULT_TF) && link->sactive)? > > More accurately, link->sactive test can be substituted with > (ap->qc_allocated & ~(1 << qc->tag)). Unfortunately we only get the ata_port and ata_taskfile in the tf_read callback, so I'm not sure if we can do the equivalent of the qc->flags & ATA_QCFLAG_RESULT_TF test (i.e. distinguishing between the error-handling case where we care if we abort outstanding commands and the normal case with a RESULT_TF command where we do).. -- Robert Hancock Saskatoon, SK, Canada To email, remove "nospam" from hancockr@nospamshaw.ca Home Page: http://www.roberthancock.com/