From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thierry Vignaud Subject: Re: [Fwd: [BUG] sata_via doesn't detect anymore my disks (broken between rc1 and rc3)] Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2006 15:56:07 +0200 Message-ID: References: <44D98E7E.3060208@pobox.com> <44E29AEF.8030606@gmail.com> <20060816051408.GI6371@htj.dyndns.org> <44E37BD4.8010709@pobox.com> <44E46E0E.4060703@gmail.com> <44EB32AD.1080305@gmail.com> <44EEEA29.1010008@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from ezoffice.mandriva.com ([84.14.106.134]:24851 "EHLO office.mandriva.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932236AbWHYN4J (ORCPT ); Fri, 25 Aug 2006 09:56:09 -0400 In-Reply-To: <44EEEA29.1010008@gmail.com> (Tejun Heo's message of "Fri, 25 Aug 2006 21:16:41 +0900") Sender: linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org To: Tejun Heo Cc: Jeff Garzik , "linux-ide@vger.kernel.org" Tejun Heo writes: > >>> Can you please test two patches attached in this mail? Just > >>> quick result will be enough. If both don't work, I'll go ahead > >>> and create a third one - which emulates the old phy hardreset > >>> exactly as I did for softreset of vt6420. > >> I'll. > >> > >> As, I've tested that using: > >> - ata_std_prereset + ata_std_softreset didn't work > >> - vt6420_prereset + ata_std_softreset worked > >> - vt6420_prereset w/o ata_std_softreset didn't work > >> > >> I simple interdiff between your two patches makes me think the > >> odds're higher the second will succeed but you've done some extra > >> changes since your previous patch. > >> I'll you tell you more about this tomorrow. > > none of both these patches worked :-( > > The second didn't work? But you said the following one liner > worked. Worked on top of *your original patch*. What's more, > + return ata_bmdma_drive_eh(ap, vt6420_prereset, ata_std_softreset, > sata_std_hardreset, ata_std_postreset); is different from: + return ata_bmdma_drive_eh(ap, vt6420_prereset, ata_std_softreset, + NULL, ata_std_postreset); Note also that I tested my one liner on top of 2.6.18-rc4-mm1 + your patch whereas I tested your latest patches on top of 2.6.18-rc4-mm2 //\\ Can this make a difference? > The second patch is essentially identical to what you did the one > liner. Can you please check it once more? I'll prepare old-sequence > hardreset in the meantime. I'll. You won't have any answer before monday though.