[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4656D602.3010105@garzik.org>
Date: Fri, 25 May 2007 08:26:42 -0400
From: Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>
To: Tejun Heo <htejun@...il.com>
CC: Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>, linux-ide@...r.kernel.org,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] libata: always use polling SETXFER
Tejun Heo wrote:
> So, I don't think the problem exists for SATA in the first place. At
> least there hasn't been any report of it and doing SETXFER by polling
> can handle all the existing cases. We can and probably should deal with
> such SATA devices when and if they come up. How are we gonna verify the
> controller doesn't crap itself and ahci TF register monitoring HSM can
> work around the weirdo when we don't have any such device? Even if we
> determine that we need to do HSM over intelligent SATA controller now, I
> think we still need to push polling SETXFER first to take care of the
> existing cases.
Doing SETXFER by polling only handles the cases where the driver
actually honors ATA_TFLAG_POLLING, which is /not/ always the case.
If the new policy ensures that it continues to be OK to /not/ honor
ATA_TFLAG_POLLING -- thus limiting SETXFER polling assumptions to older
hardware -- that's fine, and it merely needs to be documented.
But let us not make the assumption that this bandaid fixes all cases,
because the bandaid is not applied in all cases.
Jeff
-
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