From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Sergei Shtylyov Subject: Re: [PATCH] ide/libata: fix ata_id_is_cfa() Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2009 22:56:00 +0300 Message-ID: <497E1550.1000501@ru.mvista.com> References: <200901231615.38011.sshtylyov@ru.mvista.com> <497B9EE4.8010807@ru.mvista.com> <497E0548.80904@ru.mvista.com> <20090126190801.7d198246@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> <497E0EF3.2000201@ru.mvista.com> <497E101C.9040008@ru.mvista.com> <20090126194237.4897b6ce@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from h155.mvista.com ([63.81.120.155]:4219 "EHLO imap.sh.mvista.com" rhost-flags-OK-FAIL-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753043AbZAZTza (ORCPT ); Mon, 26 Jan 2009 14:55:30 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20090126194237.4897b6ce@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> Sender: linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org To: Alan Cox Cc: bzolnier@gmail.com, jgarzik@pobox.com, linux-ide@vger.kernel.org, gdu@mns.spb.ru Alan Cox wrote: >>> Improvements should be mixed with fixes. >> Should not be, I meant to type. > You neglected to reply to the rest of the mail btw. If you are going to > point people at CF specs without explanation as an response to something > then perhaps you should bother to explain why you think that magically > proves a point we disagree over I have explained everything in the prior mail. I hadn't expect you to start the patch fencing. WBR, Sergei