linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] libata: skip reset on bus not a device

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <452A00CC.4080205@gmail.com>
Date:	Mon, 09 Oct 2006 16:57:00 +0900
From:	Tejun Heo <htejun@...il.com>
To:	Joe Jin <lkmaillist@...il.com>
CC:	linux-ide@...r.kernel.org, lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@...ox.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] libata: skip reset on bus not a device

Joe Jin wrote:
>> > It's against libata development tree.  So, you downloaded the tar.gz 
>> and
>> > tested it?
> 
> no, but at latest kernel 2.6.19-rc1 use the same tree as you said, and
> it also can worked

I see.  It's irrelevant anyway.

>> And, one more thing to try.  The following patch should fix your
>> problem.  It's against v2.6.18.
>>
> 
> while applied the patch, error info gone :)
> 
> A question: if the status register return 0xFF means the device not exist?
> why not use ata_devchk()?

Many SATA controllers emulate TF registers and pass devchk even when no 
device is attached.  I don't know whether the two conditions can happen 
together - 0xFF status is usually seen on PATA.  Anyways, it's more 
reliable to test 0xFF.  Also, that's what driver/ide has been doing for 
a long long time and we don't want to deviate from it if possible.

-- 
tejun
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/