Re: [PATCH 10/13] sl82c105: add ->speedproc support

[Woody Suwalski <woodys@xandros.com>]

Sergei Shtylyov wrote:
> Hello, I wrote:
>
>>>> Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
>
>>>>> [PATCH] sl82c105: add ->speedproc support
>
>>>>> * add sl82c105_tunepio() wrapper for sl82c105_tune_drive()
>>>>>  (just to get the error value)
>
>>>>> * add sl82c105_tune_chipset() (->speedproc method) for setting
>>>>>  transfer mode
>
>>>>    Thanks for the patch!
>
>>>>  > Index: b/drivers/ide/pci/sl82c105.c
>
>>>>> ===================================================================
>>>>> --- a/drivers/ide/pci/sl82c105.c
>>>>> +++ b/drivers/ide/pci/sl82c105.c
>
>> [...]
>
>>>>> @@ -114,17 +114,45 @@ static void sl82c105_tune_drive(ide_driv
>>>>>      */
>>>>>     drive->io_32bit = 1;
>>>>>     drive->unmask    = 1;
>>>>> +
>>>>> +    return 0;
>>>>> +}
>>>>> +
>>>>> +static void sl82c105_tune_drive(ide_drive_t *drive, u8 pio)
>>>>> +{
>>>>> +    /*
>>>>> +     * TODO: find best PIO mode and set device speed here
>>>>> +     *       (requires adding helper function for getting PIO 
>>>>> cycle time)
>>>>> +     */
>
>>>>   I thought we were doing it by calling ide_get_best_pio_mode() 
>>>> above...
>
>>> We are also using ide_get_best_pio_mode() to get PIO cycle time
>>> so we can't move it here ATM.
>
>>   I've found/used quite convenient workaround for that -- return PIO 
>> mode actually selected from xxx_tune_pio(), then call 
>> ide_config_drive_speed() from the real tuneproc() method.
>
>    Works like charm with ignoring the result, since 
> ide_get_best_pio_mode() returns the same explicit mode as was passed 
> to it -- so is good for the speedproc() methods also...
>
>>>>> +    (void)sl82c105_tunepio(drive, pio);
>
>>>>    Erm, I thought afterwards that I vainly folded one into another. 
>>>> I think it's worth moving those io_32bit and unmask flag 
>>>> assignments above back there... May also recast my patch. :-)
>
>>> Moving them to ->init_hwif where they belong would be even better... 
>>> ;-)
>
>>    Well, I wasn't sure where they belong... :-)
>>    So, OK to recast that patch?
>
>   Recasted it and reworked your patch atop of it (adding MWDMA 0/1 
> support as a bonus! :-) -- now need to conduct some testing on a 
> remote target...
>
>>>>> +static int sl82c105_tune_chipset(ide_drive_t *drive, u8 mode)
>>>>> +{
>>>>> +    mode = ide_rate_filter(drive, mode);
>>>>> +
>>>>> +    if (mode >= XFER_PIO_0 && mode <= XFER_PIO_5)
>>>>> +        return sl82c105_tunepio(drive, mode - XFER_PIO_0);
>>>>> +
>>>>> +    /*
>>>>> +     * TODO: add MWDMA0/1 support
>>>>> +     */
>>>>> +    BUG_ON(mode != XFER_MW_DMA_2);
>
>   I wonder is there are some W83C554 users anywhere -- that chipset 
> also supports UltraDMA...
>
> MBR, Sergei
Sergei,

ARM Netwinder machines are running hard disk IDE on SL82c105.
Could you send me the actual source file to try (or a patch)?

Thanks, Woody