[lkml]   [2005]   [May]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [rfc/patch] libata -- port configurable delays
On Gwe, 2005-05-13 at 21:03, Benjamin LaHaise wrote:
> > 3) IIRC some rare PATA devices don't like having their Status register
> > banged "too hard". No data, just a vague memory.

Not that I am aware of. There are a few ICH/PIIX variants where if you
read status during a transaction at the wrong time bad stuff occurs
including to the block on disk. That may be what you are thinking of

> >
> > 4) It may be worthwhile to rewrite the loop to check the Status register
> > _first_, then delay.

The 400nS delay after a command is required before status becomes valid.
This isn't about 'incorrect' devices in the command case. It is about
strictly correct behaviour and propogation/response times. For the cases
its not required and you wan to keep PCI load down then checking first
is clearly logical.

Also btw beware of PCI posting - writel/ndelay(400) isn't going to do
the right thing.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-05-14 00:00    [W:0.058 / U:7.532 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site