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
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
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
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?
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
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] =
