From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Sergei Shtylyov Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3 v3] ide: add at91_ide driver Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2009 22:13:03 +0300 Message-ID: <49BAB03F.7070507@ru.mvista.com> References: <200902181106.54260.stf_xl@wp.pl> <200903111800.44380.bzolnier@gmail.com> <49BA9838.5010801@ru.mvista.com> <200903131947.49361.bzolnier@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: Received: from h155.mvista.com ([63.81.120.155]:54851 "EHLO imap.sh.mvista.com" rhost-flags-OK-FAIL-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750821AbZCMTM0 (ORCPT ); Fri, 13 Mar 2009 15:12:26 -0400 In-Reply-To: <200903131947.49361.bzolnier@gmail.com> Sender: linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org To: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz Cc: Stanislaw Gruszka , linux-ide@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Victor Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote: >>>>>>>>This is IDE host driver for AT91 (SAM9, CAP9, AT572D940HF) Stat= ic=20 >>>>>>>>Memory Controller with Compact Flash True IDE Mode logic. >>>>>>>>Driver have to switch 8/16 bit bus width when accessing Task Ti= le or=20 >>>>>>>>Data >>>>>>>>Register. Moreover some extra things need to be done when setti= ng=20 >>>>>>>>PIO mode. >>>>>>>>Only PIO mode is used, hardware have no DMA support. If interru= pt=20 >>>>>>>>line is >>>>>>>>connected through GPIO extra quirk is needed to cope with fake=20 >>>>>>>>interrupts. >>>>>>>>Signed-off-by: Stanislaw Gruszka >>>>>>> This is prolly only me, but I afil to compile this driver with= the=20 >>>>>>>current arch/arm/configs/at91sam9263ek_defconfig: >>>>>>> CC drivers/ide/at91_ide.o >>>>>>>drivers/ide/at91_ide.c: In function =E2=80=98at91_ide_input_data= =E2=80=99: >>>>>>>drivers/ide/at91_ide.c:159: error: implicit declaration of funct= ion=20 >>>>>>>=E2=80=98__ide_mm_insw=E2=80=99 >>>>>>>drivers/ide/at91_ide.c: In function =E2=80=98at91_ide_output_dat= a=E2=80=99: >>>>>>>drivers/ide/at91_ide.c:174: error: implicit declaration of funct= ion=20 >>>>>>>=E2=80=98__ide_mm_outsw=E2=80=99 >>>>>>>drivers/ide/at91_ide.c: In function =E2=80=98at91_ide_tf_load=E2= =80=99: >>>>>>>drivers/ide/at91_ide.c:192: error: =E2=80=98task=E2=80=99 undecl= ared (first use in=20 >>>>>>>this function) >>>>>>>drivers/ide/at91_ide.c:192: error: (Each undeclared identifier i= s=20 >>>>>>>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 incompa= tible=20 >>>>>>>pointer type >>>>>>>drivers/ide/at91_ide.c:304: warning: initialization from incompa= tible=20 >>>>>>>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 n= eed=20 >>>>>>to include this driver to some of your patches... >>>I did and asked people to test the final result (see my mail on merg= ing >>>at91_ide)... unfortunately it seems like I missed few spots... :) >>>> Oops, got muddled in too many follow-ups. :-)=20 >>>>> Namely, ide-remove-ide_task_t-typedef.patch is incomplete... >>>Was a bit more than that, I also needed to merge __ide_mm_* fixup be= low... >>>[ 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_datablo= ck.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=20 >>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 patc= h > 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 downloadin= g the=20 patch indeed -- perhaps I didn't really overwrite it and appended inste= ad. :-< > Thanks, > Bart WBR, Sergei