On Thu, 29 May 2008, Jeff Garzik wrote:It may be that you meant to make it an "else if" case, ie if there was noThe double-ndelay is definitely wrong, but we do need one. Technically it
IO-read, then you do a ndelay(400) as a last desperate case, but that's not
how your ata_sdd_sync() is actually written.
should -only- be a 400ns delay, but we also have a register read in there to
make sure any posted writes are flushed.
Well, but the "read + delay" is already in ata_sdd_pause().
So it's "ata_sdd_sync()" that I think is bogus. Based on its name alone, it shouldn't have a delay in it (except, as mentioned, possibly for the fallback case where no port can be used for reading).