From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mark Lord Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/02] sata_mv: workaround for multi_count errata sata24 Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2009 21:11:27 -0400 Message-ID: <49E928BF.5060402@rtr.ca> References: <49E359D6.1090309@rtr.ca> <49E35A5E.4020204@rtr.ca> <49E90AD9.7070706@pobox.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from rtr.ca ([76.10.145.34]:47497 "EHLO mail.rtr.ca" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752777AbZDRBLa (ORCPT ); Fri, 17 Apr 2009 21:11:30 -0400 In-Reply-To: <49E90AD9.7070706@pobox.com> Sender: linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org To: Jeff Garzik Cc: IDE/ATA development list Jeff Garzik wrote: > Mark Lord wrote: >> Workaround for errata SATA#24 in sata_mv. >> This errata affects WRITE_MULTI* commands when >> the device multi_count produces a DRQ block size >= 4Kbytes. >> >> We work around it here by converting such operations >> into ordinary PIO_WRITEs instead. >> >> Note that this might result in a PIO FUA write unavoidably being >> converted >> into a non-FUA write. In practice, any system using FUA is also going >> to be >> using DMA rather than PIO, so this shouldn't affect anyone in the real >> world. > > I'm applying this, but I think a follow-up patch would be nice: it > seems like a one-time printk, indicating the FUA conversion is active, > could be a help in case someone does care. .. Seems like .text bloat to me. But if you want it, I'll cook up patches for both ata_rwcmd_protocol() in libata-core.c as well as sata_mv.c later on. Cheers