[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <465B5151.4090504@garzik.org>
Date: Mon, 28 May 2007 18:01:53 -0400
From: Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>
To: Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
CC: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
IDE/ATA development list <linux-ide@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] pata_sis: FIFO whack
Alan Cox wrote:
> If you are using a SiS controller and the BIOS didn't set it up then the
> FIFO may be left active when we try and set up the CD. Not convinced this
> matters but I'd prefer to be safe
>
> Signed-off-by: Alan Cox <alan@...hat.com>
>
> diff -u --new-file --recursive --exclude-from /usr/src/exclude linux.vanilla-2.6.22-rc2-mm1/drivers/ata/pata_sis.c linux-2.6.22-rc2-mm1/drivers/ata/pata_sis.c
> --- linux.vanilla-2.6.22-rc2-mm1/drivers/ata/pata_sis.c 2007-05-25 17:39:06.000000000 +0100
> +++ linux-2.6.22-rc2-mm1/drivers/ata/pata_sis.c 2007-05-25 18:22:21.000000000 +0100
> @@ -149,6 +149,9 @@
> if (!pci_test_config_bits(pdev, &sis_enable_bits[ap->port_no]))
> return -ENOENT;
>
> + /* Clear the FIFO settings. We can't enable the FIFO until
> + we know we are poking at a disk */
> + pci_write_config_byte(pdev, 0x4B, 0);
> return ata_std_prereset(ap, deadline);
Should I queue this into #upstream (2.6.23) or #upstream-fixes
(2.6.22-rc) branch?
I lean towards #upstream since it is so late in the 2.6.22-rc cycle,
because of your comment "Not convinced this matters".
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