ATA Passthru status return descriptor additional length field

Hi, The libata code sets that field to 14 (the size of the whole status return descriptor), but the SAT spec (May 17) shows that field set to 12. Which is correct? Regards, Tim Thelin - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-ide in the body of a message to [EMAIL

Re: ATA Passthru status return descriptor additional length field

On Wed, Jul 27, 2005 at 10:13:13AM -0700, Timothy Thelin wrote: The libata code sets that field to 14 (the size of the whole status return descriptor), but the SAT spec (May 17) shows that field set to 12. Which is correct? I'm sure the spec is correct...gotta patch? :-) John -- John W.

RE: ATA Passthru status return descriptor additional length field

I have one, but I'm still working with my employer to make sure I'm allowed to submit it. Tim -Original Message- From: John W. Linville [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2005 10:26 AM To: Timothy Thelin Cc: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: ATA Passthru status

Re: ATA Passthru unimplemented protocols

Timothy Thelin wrote: I'm interested in soft reset (1) and return response information (15). But I didn't know who was doing what or had plans for what, which is why the question was so general. If I end up working on these two myself, I'd be nice to coordinate with existing efforts rather

RE: ATA Passthru unimplemented protocols

I'm interested in soft reset (1) and return response information (15). But I didn't know who was doing what or had plans for what, which is why the question was so general. If I end up working on these two myself, I'd be nice to coordinate with existing efforts rather than collide with them =)

RE: ATA Passthru unimplemented protocols

Well it doesn't seem that nasty to adopt flagged access. From a userland API point of view how about adopting the IDE driver's taskfile mechanism, and simply translating that into the yet-to-be internal flagged mechanism? Tim -Original Message- From: Jeff Garzik [mailto:[EMAIL

Re: ATA Passthru unimplemented protocols

Timothy Thelin wrote: Are there plans to eventually do them or is anyone actively working on them? Such as? Jeff - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-ide in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at

More Promise PDC Probs with sata_promise

I too am having problems with the sata_promise driver in 2.6.12 with a Sata II TX4, and a SATA on an intel SE7520BD2 board First some Idea of what we are running - Pristine Debian Sarge install Stock Kernel 2.6.12.3 (with no extra patches) Using the config from the

RE: More Promise PDC Probs with sata_promise

Gaaah - sorry forget that - it is NOT the sata II in this case, it is still the S150 TX4 -Original Message- From: Allen Bolderoff Sent: Thursday, 28 July 2005 10:49 AM To: Allen Bolderoff; 'linux-ide@vger.kernel.org' Subject: RE: More Promise PDC Probs with sata_promise Further to

[PATCH linux-2.6.13-rc3] SATA: rewritten sil24 driver

Hello, Jeff. This is rewritten sil24 driver against v2.6.13-rc3. It seems to work and am currently running stress test on it (random raw read of concurrency 4, repeatitive mount/copy/checksup/unmount). I'll keep running stress test for at least 12 hours and let you know if something goes

Re: ICH6R support 2.4.20

Jeff Garzik wrote: Siddharth Taneja wrote: Hi, I am trying to port our software system (uses a 2.4.20 kernel) to a new platform which has a ICH6R controller. Due to some reasons we cannot update our kernel to a more recent one (probably 2.4.27) which has libata support in it. I can