Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 06 Dec 2006 18:19:18 +0900 | From | Tejun Heo <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 2.6.19 2/3] sata_promise: new EH conversion |
| |
Mikael Pettersson wrote: >> Don't freeze port unconditionally. You'll end up hardresetting on every >> error. Just make sure DMA engine is stopped and the controller is in a >> sane state. If that fails, then, the port should be frozen.
Sorry, s/hardresetting/resetting/
> I'm looking into this now, but so far it seems only a reset > (what Promise calls software reset, I don't know if libata > considers it a soft or hard reset) of the ATA channel will do.
Errors properly reported by the device shouldn't cause resets. Think about ATAPI check condition.
>>> + hardreset = NULL; >>> + if (sata_scr_valid(ap)) { >>> + ehc->i.action |= ATA_EH_HARDRESET; >> Why always force HARDRESET? > > I based that on sata_sil24: > > if (sil24_init_port(ap)) { > ata_eh_freeze_port(ap); > ehc->i.action |= ATA_EH_HARDRESET; > } > > I interpreted the ATA_EH_HARDRESET as being required due to > the ata_eh_freeze_port(), but perhaps it's only there because > sil24_init_port() returned failure?
Yeap, that's right.
> A different issue, but of practical importance, is which > libata branch I should base the EH conversion on: #upstream > or #ALL? Andrew Morton's -mm kernels include the ALL patches, > but they in turn include the promise-sata-pata patches, and > there is a conflict between the PATA patch and the EH conversion. > Currently my EH conversion is based on #upstream, and I've ported > the PATA patch to apply on top of it.
#upstream, It is. #ALL is merge of all libata-dev devel branches and no development work occurs there directly.
Thanks.
-- tejun - 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/
| |