Re: [PATCH 2/3 v3] ide: add at91_ide driver

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

Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:

>>>>>>>>This is IDE host driver for AT91 (SAM9, CAP9, AT572D940HF) Static 
>>>>>>>>Memory Controller with Compact Flash True IDE Mode logic.

>>>>>>>>Driver have to switch 8/16 bit bus width when accessing Task Tile or 
>>>>>>>>Data
>>>>>>>>Register. Moreover some extra things need to be done when setting 
>>>>>>>>PIO mode.
>>>>>>>>Only PIO mode is used, hardware have no DMA support. If interrupt 
>>>>>>>>line is
>>>>>>>>connected through GPIO extra quirk is needed to cope with fake 
>>>>>>>>interrupts.

>>>>>>>>Signed-off-by: Stanislaw Gruszka <stf_xl@wp.pl>

>>>>>>>  This is prolly only me, but I afil to compile this driver with the 
>>>>>>>current arch/arm/configs/at91sam9263ek_defconfig:

>>>>>>> CC      drivers/ide/at91_ide.o
>>>>>>>drivers/ide/at91_ide.c: In function ‘at91_ide_input_data’:
>>>>>>>drivers/ide/at91_ide.c:159: error: implicit declaration of function 
>>>>>>>‘__ide_mm_insw’
>>>>>>>drivers/ide/at91_ide.c: In function ‘at91_ide_output_data’:
>>>>>>>drivers/ide/at91_ide.c:174: error: implicit declaration of function 
>>>>>>>‘__ide_mm_outsw’
>>>>>>>drivers/ide/at91_ide.c: In function ‘at91_ide_tf_load’:
>>>>>>>drivers/ide/at91_ide.c:192: error: ‘task’ undeclared (first use in 
>>>>>>>this function)
>>>>>>>drivers/ide/at91_ide.c:192: error: (Each undeclared identifier is 
>>>>>>>reported only
>>>>>>>once
>>>>>>>drivers/ide/at91_ide.c:192: error: for each function it appears in.)
>>>>>>>drivers/ide/at91_ide.c: At top level:
>>>>>>>drivers/ide/at91_ide.c:303: warning: initialization from incompatible 
>>>>>>>pointer type
>>>>>>>drivers/ide/at91_ide.c:304: warning: initialization from incompatible 
>>>>>>>pointer type
>>>>>>>make[1]: *** [drivers/ide/at91_ide.o] Error 1
>>>>>>>make: *** [drivers/ide/] Error 2

>>>>>>  Ah, it's only with pata-2.6 series applied. Bart, you clearly need 
>>>>>>to include this driver to some of your patches...

>>>I did and asked people to test the final result (see my mail on merging
>>>at91_ide)... unfortunately it seems like I missed few spots... :)

>>>>   Oops, got muddled in too many follow-ups.  :-) 

>>>>>    Namely, ide-remove-ide_task_t-typedef.patch is incomplete...

>>>Was a bit more than that, I also needed to merge __ide_mm_* fixup below...

>>>[ Anyway please verify that I got it right this time, thanks! ]

>>    No, looks like you haven't again:

>>Applying patch ide-pass-command-instead-of-request-to-ide_pio_datablock.patch
>>1 out of 3 hunks FAILED
>>missing header for unified diff at line 208 of patch
>>The text leading up to this was:
>>--------------------------
>>|                       printk(KERN_ERR "%s: multimode not set!\n",
>>|                                       drive->name);
>>--------------------------
>>No file to patch.  Skipping patch.
>>11 out of 11 hunks ignored
>>Patch ide-pass-command-instead-of-request-to-ide_pio_datablock.patch does not 
>>apply (enforce with -f)

>>    It appears that this patch has 2 hunks repeated twice now...

> Strangely, the problem seems to be on your side this time as the patch
> applies just fine here and AFAIK Stephen has successfully applied it to
> linux-next (also md5sum of patch on kernel.org matches the local copy).

> Did you forgot to re-sync the whole pata-2.6 tree by any chance?

    This was a result of re-sync... something went awry when downloading the 
patch indeed -- perhaps I didn't really overwrite it and appended instead. :-<

> Thanks,
> Bart

WBR, Sergei