[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <45B11D8D.8070105@ru.mvista.com>
Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2007 22:35:41 +0300
From: Sergei Shtylyov <sshtylyov@...mvista.com>
To: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <bzolnier@...il.com>
Cc: linux-ide@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 8/15] ide: disable DMA in ->ide_dma_check for "no IORDY"
case
Hello.
Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
>>>[PATCH] ide: disable DMA in ->ide_dma_check for "no IORDY" case
>> I've looked thru the code, and found more issues with the PIO fallback
>>there. Will try to cook up patches for at least some drivers...
> Great, if possible please base them on top of the IDE tree...
Erm, I had doubts about it (having in mind that all that code is more of a
cleanups than fixes). Maybe it'd be a good idea to separate the fix and
cleanup series somehow...
>>>Signed-off-by: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <bzolnier@...il.com>
>>>Index: b/drivers/ide/pci/aec62xx.c
>>>===================================================================
>>>--- a/drivers/ide/pci/aec62xx.c
>>>+++ b/drivers/ide/pci/aec62xx.c
>>>@@ -214,12 +214,10 @@ static int aec62xx_config_drive_xfer_rat
>>> if (ide_use_dma(drive) && config_chipset_for_dma(drive))
>>> return hwif->ide_dma_on(drive);
>>>
>>>- if (ide_use_fast_pio(drive)) {
>>>+ if (ide_use_fast_pio(drive))
>>> aec62xx_tune_drive(drive, 5);
>>
>> This function looks like it's working (thouugh having the wrong limit of
>>PIO5 on auto-tuning) but is unnecassary complex.
> Yes, it seems that there are actually two bugs here:
> * the maximum allowed PIO mode should be PIO4 not PIO5
> * for auto-tuning ("pio" == 255) it incorrectly sets PIO0
> (255 fails to the default case in the switch statement)
Yeah, you if you pass 255, it won't work (so, drive->autotune must be
broken). But the driver itself have the wrong idea of 5 meaning auto-tune, so
fallback should still work.
>> Heh, the driver is certainly a rip-off form hpt366.c. What a doubtful
>>example they have chosen... :-)
> hehe
The driver's authorship explains it all. :-)
>>>Index: b/drivers/ide/pci/atiixp.c
>>>===================================================================
>>>--- a/drivers/ide/pci/atiixp.c
>>>+++ b/drivers/ide/pci/atiixp.c
>>>@@ -264,10 +264,9 @@ static int atiixp_dma_check(ide_drive_t
>>> tspeed = ide_get_best_pio_mode(drive, 255, 5, NULL);
>>> speed = atiixp_dma_2_pio(XFER_PIO_0 + tspeed) + XFER_PIO_0;
>> It's simply stupid to convert PIO mode to PIO mode. The whole idea is
>>doubtful as well..
> It is side-effect of basing atiixp on piix driver. Fixing it will allow PIO1
> to be used (good) because atiixp_dma_2_pio() always downgrades PIO1 to PIO0
> (leftover from piix - on Intel chipsets same timings are used for PIO0/1).
>>> hwif->speedproc(drive, speed);
>> Well, well, the tuneproc() method can't ahndle auto-tunuing here
>>(255)...
> Yes, definitely a bug.
Ugh... don't expect patches form me soon though. My first priority is the
drivers that we support here...
>>And it also doesn't set up drive's own speed. The code seem to be another
>>rip-off from piix.c, repeating all its mistakes... :-)
> :)
>>>Index: b/drivers/ide/pci/cmd64x.c
>>>===================================================================
>>>--- a/drivers/ide/pci/cmd64x.c
>>>+++ b/drivers/ide/pci/cmd64x.c
>>>@@ -479,12 +479,10 @@ static int cmd64x_config_drive_for_dma (
>>> if (ide_use_dma(drive) && config_chipset_for_dma(drive))
>>> return hwif->ide_dma_on(drive);
>>>
>>>- if (ide_use_fast_pio(drive)) {
>>>+ if (ide_use_fast_pio(drive))
>>> config_chipset_for_pio(drive, 1);
>> This function will always set PIO mode 4. Mess.
> Yep.
I'm going to send the patch for both this and siimage.c...
>>>Index: b/drivers/ide/pci/cs5535.c
>>>===================================================================
>>>--- a/drivers/ide/pci/cs5535.c
>>>+++ b/drivers/ide/pci/cs5535.c
>>>@@ -206,10 +206,9 @@ static int cs5535_dma_check(ide_drive_t
>>> if (ide_use_fast_pio(drive)) {
>>> speed = ide_get_best_pio_mode(drive, 255, 4, NULL);
>>> cs5535_set_drive(drive, speed);
>> Could be folded into tuneproc() method call.
> Using ->tuneproc() will also set the PIO mode on the drive
> which is not done currently...
Hm, ide_config_drive_speed() is called by both tuneproc() method and
cs5535_set_drive(), so I saw no issue there...
>>>Index: b/drivers/ide/pci/sis5513.c
>>>===================================================================
>>>--- a/drivers/ide/pci/sis5513.c
>>>+++ b/drivers/ide/pci/sis5513.c
>>>@@ -678,12 +678,10 @@ static int sis5513_config_xfer_rate(ide_
>>> if (ide_use_dma(drive) && config_chipset_for_dma(drive))
>>> return hwif->ide_dma_on(drive);
>>>- if (ide_use_fast_pio(drive)) {
>>>+ if (ide_use_fast_pio(drive))
>>> sis5513_tune_drive(drive, 5);
>> Ugh, PIO fallback effectively always tries to set mode 4 here (thanks
>>it's not 5). Mess.
> Yep, but it seems to be even more complicated since config_art_rwp_pio()
> is a mess^2 - chipset is programmed to the best PIO mode while the
> device is set to PIO4... *sigh*...
Sorry, this one is low prio for me... :-)
> Thanks,
> Bart
MBR, Sergei
-
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists