From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1161243AbWLPRJa (ORCPT ); Sat, 16 Dec 2006 12:09:30 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1161240AbWLPRJ3 (ORCPT ); Sat, 16 Dec 2006 12:09:29 -0500 Received: from srv5.dvmed.net ([207.36.208.214]:34990 "EHLO mail.dvmed.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1161237AbWLPRJ1 (ORCPT ); Sat, 16 Dec 2006 12:09:27 -0500 Message-ID: <4584282C.5060803@pobox.com> Date: Sat, 16 Dec 2006 12:09:00 -0500 From: Jeff Garzik User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.8 (X11/20061107) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Evan Harris CC: Milan Kupcevic , Fabian Knittel , linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, Linux Kernel List , Eyal Lebedinsky , Stan Seibert , linux-ide@vger.kernel.org, Christiaan den Besten , Mikael Pettersson Subject: Re: [PATCH] sata_promise: Port enumeration order - SATA 150 TX4, SATA 300 TX4 References: <43FFAE3D.7010002@physics.harvard.edu> <44000036.7070403@eyal.emu.id.au> <011f01c639f9$8dc86bc0$3d64880a@speedy> <442DB29D.1010102@avona.com> <447CB9B4.50700@physics.harvard.edu> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: -4.3 (----) X-Spam-Report: SpamAssassin version 3.1.7 on srv5.dvmed.net summary: Content analysis details: (-4.3 points, 5.0 required) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Evan Harris wrote: > > I have a card that mirrors this one from your list: > > Retail name: SATA300 TX4 > Chip label: PDC40718-GP SATAII300 > Vendor-Device number: 105a:3d17 (rev 02) > > Through testing, I've found linux 2.6.16 and 2.6.17 find the ports in > this order (the list is ordered by linux detection): > > 1. silkscreen port 3 > 2. silkscreen port 2 > 3. silkscreen port 4 > 4. silkscreen port 1 >> NOTE: the patch I have submitted ( >> http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-ide&m=114082978311290&w=2 ) is a >> solution that doesn't know about the older Promise SATA controllers, >> which are not affected with the "new wiring" problem, so the older >> controllers will appear screwed if you use it. >> >> Hopefully we will collect enough info about all the SATA Promise >> controllers to distinguish the new and the old wiring controllers, >> then produce a new patch that will be a correct solution to the "new >> wiring" problem. Mikael Pettersson has been doing some excellent work recently on sata_promise. If enough data has been collected on this sata_promise port enumeration problem, maybe the data could be collated and proposed via Mikael as a patch? Jeff