lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Mar]   [8]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 3/3] Use correct IDE error recovery
Date

On Mar 8, 2007, at 12:34 PM, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:

>
> Hi,
>
> On Thursday 08 March 2007, Suleiman Souhlal wrote:
>>
>> On Mar 7, 2007, at 1:16 PM, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> (sorry for the long delay)
>>>
>>> On Wednesday 21 February 2007, Suleiman Souhlal wrote:
>>>> IDE error recovery is using WIN_IDLEIMMEDIATE which was only
>>>> valid for
>>>> IDE V1 and IDE V2. Modern drives will not be able to recover using
>>>> this error handling. The correct thing to do is issue a SRST
>>>> followed
>>>> by a SET_FEATURES.
>>>
>>> This change looks fine, indeed we are better of using SRST +
>>> SET_FEATURES than IDLE_IMMEDIATE.
>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Suleiman Souhlal <suleiman@google.com>
>>>>
>>>> ---
>>>> drivers/ide/ide-io.c | 35 +++++++++++-----
>>>> drivers/ide/ide-iops.c | 105 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>> +--------------------
>>>> include/linux/ide.h | 2 +
>>>> 3 files changed, 88 insertions(+), 54 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/ide/ide-io.c b/drivers/ide/ide-io.c
>>>> index c193553..2f05b4d 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/ide/ide-io.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/ide/ide-io.c
>>>> @@ -519,21 +519,21 @@ static ide_startstop_t ide_ata_error(ide
>>>> if ((stat & DRQ_STAT) && rq_data_dir(rq) == READ && hwif-
>>>>> err_stops_fifo == 0)
>>>> try_to_flush_leftover_data(drive);
>>>>
>>>> + if (rq->errors >= ERROR_MAX || blk_noretry_request(rq)) {
>>>> + ide_kill_rq(drive, rq);
>>>> + return ide_stopped;
>>>> + }
>>>> +
>>>> if (hwif->INB(IDE_STATUS_REG) & (BUSY_STAT|DRQ_STAT))
>>>> - /* force an abort */
>>>> - hwif->OUTB(WIN_IDLEIMMEDIATE, IDE_COMMAND_REG);
>>>> + rq->errors |= ERROR_RESET;
>>>>
>>>> - if (rq->errors >= ERROR_MAX || blk_noretry_request(rq))
>>>> - ide_kill_rq(drive, rq);
>>>> - else {
>>>> - if ((rq->errors & ERROR_RESET) == ERROR_RESET) {
>>>> - ++rq->errors;
>>>> - return ide_do_reset(drive);
>>>> - }
>>>> - if ((rq->errors & ERROR_RECAL) == ERROR_RECAL)
>>>> - drive->special.b.recalibrate = 1;
>>>
>>> Is the removal of ERROR_RECAL handling intentional?
>>> There is nothing about it in the patch description...
>>
>> Yes, it was intentional, but I forgot to add "while there remove some
>
> Why is it useless? What am I missing?

I thought the recalibration code didn't do anything, but upon
rereading the code I'm not so sure anymore..

-- Suleiman


-
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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2007-03-08 21:57    [W:0.177 / U:0.260 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site