Re: FUA and 311x (was Re: LibPATA code issues / 2.6.15.4)

[Jeff Garzik]

Jeff Garzik wrote:
> For libata, I think an ATA_FLAG_NO_FUA would be appropriate for 
> situations like this...  assume FUA is supported in the controller, and 
> set a flag where it is not.  Most chips will support FUA, either by 
> design or by sheer luck.  The ones that do not support FUA are the 
> controllers that snoop the ATA command opcode, and internally choose the 
> protocol based on that opcode.  For such hardware, unknown opcodes will 
> inevitably cause problems.

This also begs the question... what controller was being used, when the 
single Maxtor device listed in the blacklist was added?  Perhaps it was 
a problem with the controller, not the device.

	Jeff


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/