From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Sergei Shtylyov Subject: Re: [PATCH] ide/libata: fix ata_id_is_cfa() (take 3) Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2009 19:26:19 +0300 Message-ID: <497F35AB.8020601@ru.mvista.com> References: <200901271619.53025.sshtylyov@ru.mvista.com> <20090127133841.2405e649@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> <497F2EAD.4080705@rtr.ca> <497F3366.5020608@ru.mvista.com> <497F33CF.8020009@rtr.ca> 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]:34777 "EHLO imap.sh.mvista.com" rhost-flags-OK-FAIL-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753258AbZA0QZu (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Jan 2009 11:25:50 -0500 In-Reply-To: <497F33CF.8020009@rtr.ca> Sender: linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org To: Mark Lord Cc: Alan Cox , bzolnier@gmail.com, jgarzik@pobox.com, linux-ide@vger.kernel.org, gdu@mns.spb.ru Mark Lord wrote: >>>>> When checking for the CFA feature set support, ata_id_is_cfa() >>>>> tests bit 2 in >>>>> word 82 of the identify data instead the word 83; it also checks >>>>> the ATA/PI >>>>> version support in the word 80 (which the CompactFlash >>>>> specifications have as >>>>> reserved), this having no slightest chance to work on the modern CF >>>>> cards that >>>>> don't have 0x848A in the word 0... >>>>> Signed-off-by: Sergei Shtylyov >>>> Acked-by: Alan Cox >>> .. >>> Any chance you two could figure out this one below? >>> It *is* a CF card, but doesn't show up as such. >>> /dev/sda: >>> 044a 3fff 0000 000f 0000 0240 003f 03bc >>> 0000 0000 5052 4554 4543 2020 2020 2020 >>> 3031 3233 3541 4545 0002 0002 0004 3230 >>> 3038 3038 3035 4346 2020 2020 2020 2020 >>> 2020 2020 2020 2020 2020 2020 2020 2020 >>> 2020 2020 2020 2020 2020 2020 2020 8001 >>> 0000 0300 0000 0200 0000 0007 3fff 000f >>> 003f 3c4f 00ec 0100 0000 03bc 0000 0007 >>> 0003 0078 0078 0078 0078 0000 0000 0000 >>> 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 >>> 0010 0000 700b 400c 4003 0001 0000 0003 >> ATA device, with non-removable media >> Model Number: CF >> Serial Number: PRETEC 01235AEE >> Firmware Revision: 20080805 >> Standards: >> Supported: 4 >> Likely used: 6 >> Here's what I was afraid of: it does report the ATA revision in >> word 80. Otherwise, it seems pretty standard modern CF. What are we to >> do now, Alan? Mark, too bad that you haven't joined the argument before... >>> 207f 0001 0000 0000 fffe 600f 0000 0000 >>> 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 >>> 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 >>> 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 >>> 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 >>> 0009 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 >>> 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 >>> 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 >>> 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 >>> 81f4 0000 0000 0092 001b 0000 0000 0000 >> Here are the words 160-167.; word 163 reports PIO6 and MWDMA3 max, >> PIO6 selected... > .. > Note that, in hdparm-prerelease, I now do something very similar > to the libata patch, except I skip the !id[82] check. This works !id[80] you mean? > for this card, at least. > -ml MBR, Sergei