Re: [PATCH] Re: [git patches] libata updates - (improve post-resetdevice ready test) regression

[Tejun Heo]

Jeff Garzik wrote:
> Tejun Heo wrote:
> > This means that we need to make custom readiness tests for controllers 
> > using 0x77 or 0x7f.  Eeeek... Both groups of controllers are behaving 
> > in incorrect way.  Controllers shouldn't use 0x77 or 0x7f for either 
> > busy or ready states - it's invalid for both, yet, some use the 77/7f 
> > for busy while others use them for ready state.  Great.  :-(
>
> I think that's assuming too much?  PATA and SATA are quite different 
> here... in PATA the status is mostly the value from the device directly 
> off the wires.  in SATA, it may be from the device or from the 
> controller.  And "smart" or firmware-based controllers may generate 
> their own status, too, apart from the device's status.
>
> So that results in varied status returns, and not all the time is a 
> definite "ready" or "not ready" obvious.

I think it's pretty safe to say that these weird ready values are from 
TF emulation on controller side.  The ready/not ready distinction is 
probably too simplistic but those values aren't supposed to appear 
during post-reset readiness test.

Sorry about the big regression.  Heh... It's amazing how all the 
controllers I tested didn't show the problem and I did test a good 
number of combinations.

I still think it would be better to have a unified readiness test 
function.  The problem is subtle (device misdetection on hotplug of 
certain drives) and went unnoticed quite some time for JMB ahcis && test 
coverage over those things can't be good.  I'll try to think about 
something better.

Thanks.

--
tejun
--
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/