[lkml]   [2005]   [May]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [rfc/patch] libata -- port configurable delays
Alan Cox wrote:
> On Gwe, 2005-05-13 at 19:58, Benjamin LaHaise wrote:
>>is available at
>>Before this patch __delay() is the number one entry in oprofile
>>results for this workload. Does this look like a reasonable approach
>>for chipsets that aren't completely braindead? Cheers,
> If your chipset implements the 400nS lockout in hardware it certainly
> seems to make sense. Nice to know someone has put it in hardware

No, it's just mostly irrelevant under SATA.

Under SATA you are -not- talking to a device when you touch
Status/AltStatus, you are talking to the host controller. Specifically,
you're talking to a controller buffer that stores a copy of the ATA
shadow registers.

The ATA registers are transmitted to the device in a single packet,
called a FIS, when the Command or Device Control register is written.

When the device updates its status, or completes a command, it sends a
FIS from device to controller, instructing the controller to update its
cached copy of the Status register.

You're bitbanging a buffer, in SATA.


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 01:28    [W:0.084 / U:10.996 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site