From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S964778AbVLBCBJ (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 Dec 2005 21:01:09 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S964781AbVLBCBJ (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 Dec 2005 21:01:09 -0500 Received: from mail.dvmed.net ([216.237.124.58]:26845 "EHLO mail.dvmed.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S964778AbVLBCBH (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 Dec 2005 21:01:07 -0500 Message-ID: <438FAADC.6060907@pobox.com> Date: Thu, 01 Dec 2005 21:01:00 -0500 From: Jeff Garzik User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.7-1.1.fc4 (X11/20050929) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Tejun Heo CC: Ethan Chen , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Carlos Pardo , Linux-ide Subject: Re: SIL_QUIRK_MOD15WRITE workaround problem on 2.6.14 References: <438BD351.60902@ucla.edu> <438D2792.9050105@gmail.com> <438D2DCC.4010805@pobox.com> <438D3AA8.9030504@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <438D3AA8.9030504@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 0.1 (/) X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "srv2.dvmed.net", has identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: Tejun Heo wrote: > Ethan confirmed that it's 1095:3114. Arghhh.... Maybe we should keep > m15w quirk for 3114's for the time being? Better be slow than hang. > Whatever bug the m15w quirk was hiding. [...] Content analysis details: (0.1 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- 0.1 RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL RBL: SORBS: sent directly from dynamic IP address [69.134.188.146 listed in dnsbl.sorbs.net] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Tejun Heo wrote: > Ethan confirmed that it's 1095:3114. Arghhh.... Maybe we should keep > m15w quirk for 3114's for the time being? Better be slow than hang. > Whatever bug the m15w quirk was hiding. A generic 'slow_down_io' module option is reasonable. It is not appropriate to apply mod15write quirk to hardware that isn't affected by the chip bug. A better solution is to write a 311x-specific interrupt handler. Jeff