Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH] IDE Power Management, try 3 | From | Benjamin Herrenschmidt <> | Date | 10 Jun 2003 17:56:05 +0200 |
| |
On Tue, 2003-06-10 at 16:23, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote: > On 10 Jun 2003, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > > > On Fri, 2003-06-06 at 23:25, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote: > > > I have corrected it a bit and I am going to submit it, any comments? > > > > > > Ben, can you verify my changes and check that it still works after 'fixing'? > > > :-) > > > > Heh, thanks for the "corrections" ;) > > > > Regarding ide_wait_not_busy(), I'd rather have it return -ENODEV > > when it reads 0xff, what do you think ? > > Nope, if you change it to return -ENODEV callers will fail.
Yup, that's the point, -ENODEV clearly mean don't bother probing here, I'm reading 0xff, so there really mustn't be anything connected out there. No ? At least that is why I added this 0xff test at first, because some controllers with a non-wired bus don't even pull low the BSY line as spec say they should do.
The -EBUSY case is tricky, it means the BSY bit stayed up for more than the max timeout allowed by spec. Currently, I just continue probing with a warning printed, ideally, we should probably try to reset or send an EDD to the drive and then wait again, but then, I'm not sure this case ever happens so...
> > I'll test the patch later today (just back from a long week-end), > > Ben. > > Good!
And it still works it seems ;) I haven't stressed it much yet though, I have other problems with 2.5 right now, but I think it can go to Linus, we can improve the actual state machines for individual subdrivers later on.
Ben. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |