From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff Garzik Subject: Re: [PATCH] pata_it8213: MWDMA0 is unsupported Date: Thu, 03 Dec 2009 16:04:42 -0500 Message-ID: <4B1827EA.4050608@garzik.org> References: <200911261728.36433.bzolnier@gmail.com> <200911261800.55025.bzolnier@gmail.com> <4B0EB986.2010801@ru.mvista.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mail-yw0-f182.google.com ([209.85.211.182]:51951 "EHLO mail-yw0-f182.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751192AbZLCVEi (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 Dec 2009 16:04:38 -0500 In-Reply-To: <4B0EB986.2010801@ru.mvista.com> Sender: linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org To: Sergei Shtylyov Cc: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz , linux-ide@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 11/26/2009 12:23 PM, Sergei Shtylyov wrote: > Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote: > >>> MWDMA0 timings cannot be met with the PIIX based controller >>> programming interface. > >>> This change should be safe as this is how we have been doing >>> things in IDE it8213 host driver for years. > >>> Signed-off-by: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz >>> --- >>> Verified with the documentation (similar case as with pata_efar). > >> Uhhh, no... > >> Too many damn drivers. > >> Too much damn duplication. > >> Too much damn subtle differences here and there. > >> The hardware is probably fine for MWMDA0 when it comes to >> pata_{efar,it8213}, >> it just not documented properly in the data sheet. > > How so with pata_efar? The active/recovery bitfields are still 2-bit > wide, no? So.... pata_it8213 is fine for MWDMA0, then? Jeff