linux-kernel - Re: Proposed changes for libata speed handling

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Date:	Sat, 13 Jan 2007 10:01:58 +0000
From:	Alan <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
To:	Tejun Heo <htejun@...il.com>
Cc:	linux-ide@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Proposed changes for libata speed handling

O> Wouldn't it be better to have ->determine_xfer_mask() and
> ->set_specific_mode() than having two somewhat overlapping callbacks?
> Or is there some problem that can't be handled that way?

I'm not sure I follow what you are suggesting - can you explain further.

Right now ->set_mode does all the policy management with regards to
picking the right modes which is sometimes done by the usual ATA rules
and sometimes by card specific code.

->set_specific_mode does no policy work but merely sets up a mode.

The default behaviour of ->set_mode() is the ATA mode selection by best
mode available, and this function is normally not provided by a driver.

The default behaviour of ->set_specific_mode() is to verify the mode is
valid then issue ->set_pio|dma_mode() (for both devices in case a timing
change on both is triggered). This function is overridable because of
things like IT821x where the IDE mode is imaginary.

Alan
-
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/