linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] sata_nv: don't use legacy DMA in ADMA mode

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: <4744D1EF.5010406@gmail.com>
Date:	Thu, 22 Nov 2007 09:48:47 +0900
From:	Tejun Heo <htejun@...il.com>
To:	Robert Hancock <hancockr@...w.ca>
CC:	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	ide <linux-ide@...r.kernel.org>, Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] sata_nv: don't use legacy DMA in ADMA mode

Robert Hancock wrote:
> Tejun Heo wrote:
>> Tejun Heo wrote:
>>> If so, can you please add that switching into register mode is okay as
>>> long as there's no other ADMA commands in flight and add
>>> WARN_ON((qc->flags & ATA_QCFLAG_RESULT_TF) && link->sactive)?
>>
>> More accurately, link->sactive test can be substituted with
>> (ap->qc_allocated & ~(1 << qc->tag)).
> 
> Unfortunately we only get the ata_port and ata_taskfile in the tf_read
> callback, so I'm not sure if we can do the equivalent of the qc->flags &
> ATA_QCFLAG_RESULT_TF test (i.e. distinguishing between the
> error-handling case where we care if we abort outstanding commands and
> the normal case with a RESULT_TF command where we do)..

You can test it in ->qc_issue(), no?

-- 
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/