[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <494F69C4.2060708@kernel.org>
Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2008 19:19:48 +0900
From: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To: Robert Hancock <hancockr@...w.ca>
CC: ide <linux-ide@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sata_sil: add Large Block Transfer support
Hello,
Robert Hancock wrote:
> Obviously not 2.6.28 material, but could potentially head into .29.
> I've done some testing with a DVD drive connected to this controller
> and verified that reading off an entire DVD returns correct data
> (and that the controller is actually getting requests that cross
> 64K boundaries). More testing would certainly be useful..
Ah... nice. It would be great to have this in -next for some time.
> +static void sil_bmdma_stop(struct ata_queued_cmd *qc)
> +{
> + struct ata_port *ap = qc->ap;
> + void __iomem *mmio_base = ap->host->iomap[SIL_MMIO_BAR];
> + void __iomem *bmdma2 = mmio_base + sil_port[ap->port_no].bmdma2;
> +
> + /* clear start/stop bit - can safely always write 0 */
> + writeb(0, bmdma2);
ioread/iowrite?
> + /* one-PIO-cycle guaranteed wait, per spec, for HDMA1:0 transition */
> + ata_sff_dma_pause(ap);
> +}
> +
> +static void sil_bmdma_setup(struct ata_queued_cmd *qc)
> +{
> + struct ata_port *ap = qc->ap;
> + void __iomem *bmdma = ap->ioaddr.bmdma_addr;
> +
> + /* load PRD table addr. */
> + mb(); /* make sure PRD table writes are visible to controller */
I know it's not specific to this change but does mb() really make
sense here? I don't think we need any barrier here.
> + writel(ap->prd_dma, bmdma + ATA_DMA_TABLE_OFS);
> +
> + /* issue r/w command */
> + ap->ops->sff_exec_command(ap, &qc->tf);
> +}
Thanks.
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists