Re: [PATCH RFC] sata_promise: make pdc_atapi_pkt() use values from qc-tf
On Mon, 03 Dec 2007 13:49:36 +0900, Tejun Heo wrote: Mikael Pettersson wrote: what was the outcome of this discussion? I haven't looked over the Promise datasheet nor checked my brain for details, hoping Mikael would do that for me ;-) I've now tested this on top of 2.6.24-rc3, with no observable regressions. Blanking, writing, and mounting/reading CD-RWs on both SATAPI and PATAPI works (tested on a 300 TX2plus card). I can't find anything in Promise's public docs or reference driver about non-standard requirements on lbam/lbah in ATAPI packets. The values set by core layer should be good enough. The only thing I'm worried about is setting transfer chunk size when protocol is DMA. As setting this value hasn't caused any problem for other controllers and it seems sata_promise doesn't seem to have problem with it either, I'm leaning toward keeping this value but if setting this value to zero is the right thing to do, we can definitely change that in the core layer. One way or the other, I'd really like to keep sata_promise's behavior in line with other libata drivers. So, Mikael, do you think it would be okay to include the patch for #upstream and see how it works in -mm? Yes /Mikael - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-ide in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: [PATCH RFC] sata_promise: make pdc_atapi_pkt() use values from qc-tf
On Sat, 01 Dec 2007 18:23:44 -0500, Jeff Garzik wrote: Tejun Heo wrote: Make pdc_atapi_pkt() use values from qc-tf instead of creating its own. This is to ease future ATAPI handling changes. DONT APPLY YET --- Mikael, would this work? Values other than lbam and lbah remain the same. Does sata_promise have strict requirements for lbam and lbah? Thanks. drivers/ata/sata_promise.c | 34 +- 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-) what was the outcome of this discussion? I haven't looked over the Promise datasheet nor checked my brain for details, hoping Mikael would do that for me ;-) I've now tested this on top of 2.6.24-rc3, with no observable regressions. Blanking, writing, and mounting/reading CD-RWs on both SATAPI and PATAPI works (tested on a 300 TX2plus card). I can't find anything in Promise's public docs or reference driver about non-standard requirements on lbam/lbah in ATAPI packets. /Mikael - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-ide in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: [PATCH RFC] sata_promise: make pdc_atapi_pkt() use values from qc-tf
Mikael Pettersson wrote: what was the outcome of this discussion? I haven't looked over the Promise datasheet nor checked my brain for details, hoping Mikael would do that for me ;-) I've now tested this on top of 2.6.24-rc3, with no observable regressions. Blanking, writing, and mounting/reading CD-RWs on both SATAPI and PATAPI works (tested on a 300 TX2plus card). I can't find anything in Promise's public docs or reference driver about non-standard requirements on lbam/lbah in ATAPI packets. The values set by core layer should be good enough. The only thing I'm worried about is setting transfer chunk size when protocol is DMA. As setting this value hasn't caused any problem for other controllers and it seems sata_promise doesn't seem to have problem with it either, I'm leaning toward keeping this value but if setting this value to zero is the right thing to do, we can definitely change that in the core layer. One way or the other, I'd really like to keep sata_promise's behavior in line with other libata drivers. So, Mikael, do you think it would be okay to include the patch for #upstream and see how it works in -mm? Thanks. -- tejun - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-ide in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: [PATCH RFC] sata_promise: make pdc_atapi_pkt() use values from qc-tf
Tejun Heo wrote: Make pdc_atapi_pkt() use values from qc-tf instead of creating its own. This is to ease future ATAPI handling changes. DONT APPLY YET --- Mikael, would this work? Values other than lbam and lbah remain the same. Does sata_promise have strict requirements for lbam and lbah? Thanks. drivers/ata/sata_promise.c | 34 +- 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-) what was the outcome of this discussion? I haven't looked over the Promise datasheet nor checked my brain for details, hoping Mikael would do that for me ;-) - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-ide in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: [PATCH RFC] sata_promise: make pdc_atapi_pkt() use values from qc-tf
On Mon, 26 Nov 2007 20:34:38 +0900, Tejun Heo wrote:
Make pdc_atapi_pkt() use values from qc-tf instead of creating its
own. This is to ease future ATAPI handling changes.
DONT APPLY YET
---
Mikael, would this work? Values other than lbam and lbah remain the
same. Does sata_promise have strict requirements for lbam and lbah?
...
/* set feature and byte counter registers */
- if (qc-tf.protocol != ATA_PROT_ATAPI_DMA) {
+ if (qc-tf.protocol != ATA_PROT_ATAPI_DMA)
feature = PDC_FEATURE_ATAPI_PIO;
- /* set byte counter register to real transfer byte count */
- nbytes = qc-nbytes;
- if (nbytes 0x)
- nbytes = 0x;
- } else {
+ else
feature = PDC_FEATURE_ATAPI_DMA;
- /* set byte counter register to 0 */
- nbytes = 0;
- }
+
buf[20] = (1 5) | ATA_REG_FEATURE;
buf[21] = feature;
buf[22] = (1 5) | ATA_REG_BYTEL;
- buf[23] = nbytes 0xFF;
+ buf[23] = qc-tf.lbam;
buf[24] = (1 5) | ATA_REG_BYTEH;
- buf[25] = (nbytes 8) 0xFF;
+ buf[25] = qc-tf.lbah;
The original code matches what Promise' own driver does, including
the set byte counter register to real transfer byte count comment.
It's certainly possible that if lbah/lbam don't match -nbytes,
the HW will go nuts. Their data sheets are very quiet about ATAPI.
I can test your proposed change next weekend when I'm back to where
my sata_promise test equipment is.
/Mikael
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-ide in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: [PATCH RFC] sata_promise: make pdc_atapi_pkt() use values from qc-tf
Hello, Mikael Pettersson wrote: buf[20] = (1 5) | ATA_REG_FEATURE; buf[21] = feature; buf[22] = (1 5) | ATA_REG_BYTEL; -buf[23] = nbytes 0xFF; +buf[23] = qc-tf.lbam; buf[24] = (1 5) | ATA_REG_BYTEH; -buf[25] = (nbytes 8) 0xFF; +buf[25] = qc-tf.lbah; The original code matches what Promise' own driver does, including the set byte counter register to real transfer byte count comment. It's certainly possible that if lbah/lbam don't match -nbytes, the HW will go nuts. Their data sheets are very quiet about ATAPI. Yeah, now core code sets the value properly and I just posted a patch to massage transfer chunk size a bit so I was curious whether now sata_promise can use the result of core layer instead. I can test your proposed change next weekend when I'm back to where my sata_promise test equipment is. Thank you. -- tejun - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-ide in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
