Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear "Steven A. Falco",
>
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
>> I realized that I should be checking to see if word 163 is applicable to
>> the ATA device in question. To do that, I need to call ata_id_is_cfa() from
>> libata.h. However, libata.h conflicts with ata.h because of duplicate
>> enum values.
>>
>> Therefore, this respin of the proposed patch deletes the duplicate enums
>> from ata.h and instead includes libata.h to supply the enums. Then, I
>> can call ata_id_is_cfa() and more accurately detect PIO 5 and 6.
>>
>> I believe cleaning up ata.h is a good thing, because duplicating the enums in
>> both places invites them to get out of sync.
>
> It is, but can you please split this into two independent patches?
>
> Thanks in advance.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Wolfgang Denk
>
[PATCH 3/3] Typo in spelling of ATAPI.
Correct a small spelling mistake.
Signed-off-by: Steven A. Falco <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
common/cmd_ide.c | 2 +-
1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/common/cmd_ide.c b/common/cmd_ide.c
index 0691007..a744b41 100644
--- a/common/cmd_ide.c
+++ b/common/cmd_ide.c
@@ -1822,7 +1822,7 @@ unsigned char atapi_issue(int device,unsigned char*
ccb,int ccblen, unsigned cha
c = atapi_wait_mask(device,ATAPI_TIME_OUT,mask,res);
if ((c & mask) != res) { /* DRQ must be 1, BSY 0 */
- printf ("ATTAPI_ISSUE: Error (no IRQ) before sending ccb dev %d
status
0x%02x\n",device,c);
+ printf ("ATAPI_ISSUE: Error (no IRQ) before sending ccb dev %d
status
0x%02x\n",device,c);
err=0xFF;
goto AI_OUT;
}
--
1.5.5.1
_______________________________________________
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
