Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 03 Feb 2007 19:30:00 +0300 | From | Sergei Shtylyov <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 13/15] ide: fix UDMA/MWDMA/SWDMA masks |
| |
Hello.
Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
>>>Index: b/drivers/ide/pci/cmd64x.c >>>=================================================================== >>>--- a/drivers/ide/pci/cmd64x.c >>>+++ b/drivers/ide/pci/cmd64x.c >>>@@ -695,9 +695,10 @@ static void __devinit init_hwif_cmd64x(i >>> hwif->swdma_mask = 0x07; >>> >>> if (dev->device == PCI_DEVICE_ID_CMD_643) >>>- hwif->ultra_mask = 0x80; >>>+ hwif->ultra_mask = 0x00; >>> if (dev->device == PCI_DEVICE_ID_CMD_646) >>>- hwif->ultra_mask = (class_rev > 0x04) ? 0x07 : 0x80; >>>+ hwif->ultra_mask = >>>+ (class_rev == 0x05 || class_rev == 0x07) ? 0x07 : 0x00; >>> if (dev->device == PCI_DEVICE_ID_CMD_648) >>> hwif->ultra_mask = 0x1f;
>> Hm, well, this doesn't look consistent with the changes in other drivers. >>This driver asks for explicit hwif->cds->ultra_mask initializers, IMO... >> You'd only have to check for PCI-646 revisions < 5 then...
> reworked
Thanks. :-)
>>>Index: b/drivers/ide/pci/piix.c >>>=================================================================== >>>--- a/drivers/ide/pci/piix.c >>>+++ b/drivers/ide/pci/piix.c >>> default: >>> if (!hwif->udma_four) >>> hwif->udma_four = piix_cable_detect(hwif);
>> This one also certainly asks for explicit hwif->cds->ultra_mask >>initializers... Thus almost all of this switch statement could go away...
> Alas doing it now would make the nice DECLARE_PIIX_DEV() macro go away
Why? Could add another argument to that macro...
> (=> a lot of duplicated code)... could be done in the future...
Yes, of course.
> Thanks, > Bart
MBR, Sergei - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |