Re: [PATCH] ide/libata: fix ata_id_is_cfa()

[Sergei Shtylyov <sshtylyov@ru.mvista.com>]

Hello, I wrote:

>>>>>> +    if (id[ATA_ID_MAJOR_VER] == 0xFFFF)
>>>>>> +        return 0;
>>>>>> +    return (id[ATA_ID_MAJOR_VER] & (1 << v)) ? 1 : 0;

>>>>>   Refer to afa_dev_cf_sata() on how it's done in really optimal way.

>>>> To what ? - there is no ata or afa_dev_cf_sata ?

>>>    Very funny. Meant to be ata_dev_is_sata(), of course.

>> We don't have one of those either - do you mean ata_id_is_sata ?

   Sure I have, just got used to its original name, ide_dev_is_sata().

>> If so then yes that looks like it might be slightly cleaner although its
>> probably one instruction difference from the .s files.

>    That extra *if* cost more than instruction I think.

    At least 2 on x86.

>> I'll redo it that way

>    OK, just leave ata_dev_is_cfa() alone and rename the patch.

    Just reposted my patch with better description.

MBR, Sergei