From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tejun Heo Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/9] libata-acpi: improve _GTF execution error handling and reporting Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2007 23:15:32 +0900 Message-ID: <47629004.4040701@gmail.com> References: <11976129411285-git-send-email-htejun@gmail.com> <11976129433239-git-send-email-htejun@gmail.com> <47628F3A.1060806@rtr.ca> 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 ([209.85.198.186]:40468 "EHLO rv-out-0910.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752414AbXLNOPi (ORCPT ); Fri, 14 Dec 2007 09:15:38 -0500 Received: by rv-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id k20so955863rvb.1 for ; Fri, 14 Dec 2007 06:15:38 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <47628F3A.1060806@rtr.ca> Sender: linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org To: Mark Lord Cc: jeff@garzik.org, hancockr@shaw.ca, linux-ide@vger.kernel.org Mark Lord wrote: > Tejun Heo wrote: >> As _GTF commands can't transfer data, device error never signals >> transfer error. It indicates that the device vetoed the operation, so >> it's meaningless to retry. > .. > > The SECURITY commands may pass a data block to the drive, > containing the password required to unlock/freeze a drive. > I suspect ACPI on many machines will issue such a command, > and it does indeed transfer data (512 bytes). Surprise, ACPI _GTF can't do that. Don't ask me why. :-) -- tejun