libata: minor fix for 2.6.16-rc3
PATCH 1/1 libata: minor fix for 2.6.16-rc3
Jeff,
Just two minor fixes from libata-dev tree that might be good for 2.6.16:
- Fix the array index value in ata_rwcmd_protocol() for the added FUA commands.
- Filter out ATAPI packet command error messages in ata_pio_error()
Patch against the mainline 2.6.16-rc3 tree.
For your review, thanks.
Albert
---
drivers/scsi/libata-core.c +4 -3
@@ -614,7 +614,7 @@ int ata_rwcmd_protocol(struct ata_queued }else if (lba48 && (qc->ap->flags &ATA_FLAG_PIO_LBA48 )) {/* Unable to use DMA due to host limitation */ tf->protocol =ATA_PROT_PIO ; - index = dev->multi_count ?0 :4 ; + index = dev->multi_count ?0 :8 ; }else { tf->protocol =ATA_PROT_DMA ; index =16 ;
@@ -3357,11 +3357,12 @@ static void ata_pio_error(struct ata_por {struct ata_queued_cmd *qc; -printk (KERN_WARNING "ata%u: PIO error\n" , ap->id); - qc =ata_qc_from_tag (ap, ap->active_tag);assert (qc !=NULL ); +if (qc->tf.command !=ATA_CMD_PACKET ) +printk (KERN_WARNING "ata%u: PIO error\n" , ap->id); +/* make sure qc->err_mask is available to * know what's wrong and recover */
Hello, Albert. Hello, Jeff.
Quoted 4 lines · Albert Lee
Jeff,
Just two minor fixes from libata-dev tree that might be good for 2.6.16:
- Fix the array index value inata_rwcmd_protocol()for the added FUA commands.
Oops, this one seems critical. Guess I messed up during FUA changes, sorry. :-( Albert, can you please re-spin this part of the patch against #upstream?
Thanks.
Quoted 37 lines
- Filter out ATAPI packet command error messages in
ata_pio_error()Patch against the mainline 2.6.16-rc3 tree.
For your review, thanks.Albert
Signed-off-by Albert Lee <[email protected]>---
drivers/scsi/libata-core.c +4
-3@@ -614,7 +614,7 @@ int ata_rwcmd_protocol(struct ata_queued }else if (lba48 && (qc->ap->flags &ATA_FLAG_PIO_LBA48 )) {/* Unable to use DMA due to host limitation */ tf->protocol =ATA_PROT_PIO ; - index = dev->multi_count ?0 :4 ; + index = dev->multi_count ?0 :8 ; }else { tf->protocol =ATA_PROT_DMA ; index =16 ;@@ -3357,11 +3357,12 @@ static void ata_pio_error(struct ata_por {struct ata_queued_cmd *qc; -printk (KERN_WARNING "ata%u: PIO error\n" , ap->id); - qc =ata_qc_from_tag (ap, ap->active_tag);assert (qc !=NULL ); +if (qc->tf.command !=ATA_CMD_PACKET ) +printk (KERN_WARNING "ata%u: PIO error\n" , ap->id); +/* make sure qc->err_mask is available to * know what's wrong and recover */
Signature · 1 line
tejun
PATCH 1/1 libata: minor fix for 2.6.16 (respin)
Jeff,
Respin two minor fixes from libata-dev tree that might be good for 2.6.16:
- Fix the array index value in ata_rwcmd_protocol() for the added FUA commands. (This only affects some VIA PATA adapters. Other hardware is safe from this bug.)
- Filter out ATAPI packet command error messages in ata_pio_error()
Patch against the libata-dev upstream branch
(f1b318793dcd2d9ff6b5ac06e7762098fa079cee).
For your review, thanks.
Albert
---
drivers/scsi/libata-core.c +4 -3
@@ -213,7 +213,7 @@ int ata_rwcmd_protocol(struct ata_queued }else if (lba48 && (qc->ap->flags &ATA_FLAG_PIO_LBA48 )) {/* Unable to use DMA due to host limitation */ tf->protocol =ATA_PROT_PIO ; - index = dev->multi_count ?0 :4 ; + index = dev->multi_count ?0 :8 ; }else { tf->protocol =ATA_PROT_DMA ; index =16 ;
@@ -3426,11 +3426,12 @@ static void ata_pio_error(struct ata_por {struct ata_queued_cmd *qc; -printk (KERN_WARNING "ata%u: PIO error\n" , ap->id); - qc =ata_qc_from_tag (ap, ap->active_tag);WARN_ON (qc ==NULL ); +if (qc->tf.command !=ATA_CMD_PACKET ) +printk (KERN_WARNING "ata%u: PIO error\n" , ap->id); +/* make sure qc->err_mask is available to * know what's wrong and recover */
Re: [PATCH] libata: minor fix for 2.6.16 (respin)
Quoted 10 lines · Albert Lee
Jeff,
Respin two minor fixes from libata-dev tree that might be good for 2.6.16:
- Fix the array index value inata_rwcmd_protocol()for the added FUA commands. (This only affects some VIA PATA adapters. Other hardware is safe from this bug.)
- Filter out ATAPI packet command error messages inata_pio_error()Patch against the libata-dev upstream branch
(f1b318793dcd2d9ff6b5ac06e7762098fa079cee).
For your review, thanks.
I pulled this in via upstream-fixes, please confirm that #upstream and #irq-pio look OK...
Jeff