Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 28 May 2007 21:31:35 -0400 | From | Jeff Garzik <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] libata: implement ata_wait_after_reset() |
| |
Tejun Heo wrote: > - msleep(150); > + /* wait a while before checking status */ > + ata_wait_after_reset(ap, deadline); [...] > - msleep(150); > + /* wait a while before checking status */ > + ata_wait_after_reset(ap, deadline); > > /* Before we perform post reset processing we want to see if > * the bus shows 0xFF because the odd clown forgets the D7 > @@ -3543,8 +3583,8 @@ int sata_std_hardreset(struct ata_port * > return 0; > } > > - /* wait a while before checking status, see SRST for more info */ > - msleep(150); > + /* wait a while before checking status */ > + ata_wait_after_reset(ap, deadline); > > rc = ata_wait_ready(ap, deadline); [...] > - msleep(150); > + /* wait a while before checking status */ > + ata_wait_after_reset(ap, deadline); > > /* Before we perform post reset processing we want to see if > * the bus shows 0xFF because the odd clown forgets the D7 > Index: work/drivers/ata/sata_inic162x.c > =================================================================== > --- work.orig/drivers/ata/sata_inic162x.c > +++ work/drivers/ata/sata_inic162x.c > @@ -446,7 +446,7 @@ static int inic_hardreset(struct ata_por > struct ata_taskfile tf; > > /* wait a while before checking status */ > - msleep(150); > + ata_wait_after_reset(ap, deadline); > > rc = ata_wait_ready(ap, deadline); [...]
The main thing that bothers me is not the increase in delay, but the fact that this create converts a delay/Status-poll sequence into a delay/Status-poll/Status-poll sequence.
ata_wait_after_reset() immediately before ata_wait_ready() seems highly redundant. Why not just poll Status once?
Jeff
- 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/
| |