From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:58042) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZCWWT-0005fo-Uo for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 07 Jul 2015 13:19:10 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZCWWS-0008Dv-Q4 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 07 Jul 2015 13:19:09 -0400 Message-ID: <559C0A06.3000402@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 07 Jul 2015 13:19:02 -0400 From: John Snow MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1436219392-31915-1-git-send-email-jsnow@redhat.com> <1436219392-31915-2-git-send-email-jsnow@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <1436219392-31915-2-git-send-email-jsnow@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1/2] ahci: Fix CD-ROM signature List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: qemu-block@nongnu.org Cc: pbonzini@redhat.com, hare@suse.de, stefanha@redhat.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org On 07/06/2015 05:49 PM, John Snow wrote: > From: Hannes Reinecke > > The CD-ROM signature is 0xeb140101, not 0xeb140000. > Without this change OVMF/Duet runs into a timeout trying > to detect a SATA cdrom. > > Signed-off-by: Hannes Reinecke > Signed-off-by: John Snow > --- > hw/ide/ahci.h | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/hw/ide/ahci.h b/hw/ide/ahci.h > index 9f5b4d2..68d5074 100644 > --- a/hw/ide/ahci.h > +++ b/hw/ide/ahci.h > @@ -166,7 +166,7 @@ > #define AHCI_CMD_HDR_CMD_FIS_LEN 0x1f > #define AHCI_CMD_HDR_PRDT_LEN 16 > > -#define SATA_SIGNATURE_CDROM 0xeb140000 > +#define SATA_SIGNATURE_CDROM 0xeb140101 > #define SATA_SIGNATURE_DISK 0x00000101 > > #define AHCI_GENERIC_HOST_CONTROL_REGS_MAX_ADDR 0x20 > FWIW for review purposes, this is based on ATA8 AC3, Table 184 "Device Signatures for Normal Output" and is very straightforward. For how the component fields there (LBA and Count) become a single 4 byte signature, see AHCI 1.3 section 3.3.9 (PxSIG) and this is the value we are emulating here with the #define. I gave this patch a soft ACK in the past, but it feels wrong to give it an R-B when I'm sending it out myself :) --js