Re: PATCH: (For review) Teach libata to tune master/slave seperately

[Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <bzolnier@gmail.com>]

On 1/18/06, Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> wrote:
> On Mer, 2006-01-18 at 12:40 +0100, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
> > The core logic is changed (in the positive way): ata_pio_modes()
> > is finally used for obtaining PIO mask to be used.
>
> Ah yes, Jeff hadn't previously merged the small version of that change.
> Indeed description is a little incorrect.
>
> > Please update the patch description or make it a separate change.
> >
> > The other functional change is the ordering of programming host/devices:
> >
> > previously:
> > * program PIO for device 0 [host]
> > * program PIO for device 1 [host]
> > * program DMA for device 0 [host]
> > * program DMA for device 1 [host]
> > * program xfer mode for device 0 [device]
> > * program xfer mode for device 1 [device]
> >
> > now:
> > * program PIO for device 0 [host]
> > * program DMA for device 0 [host]
> > * program xfer mode for device 0 [device]
> > * program PIO for device 1 [host]
> > * program DMA for device 1 [host]
> > * program xfer mode for device 0 [device]
> >
> > This change is OK but I wonder what is the reason for it?
>
> It simply how suffling the code re-ordered it. I don't think its a
> problem but if anyone has a problem I can go and re-re-order it.

I think it is fine, no need for change.

> libata also really should do adev->pio_mode = XFER_PIO_0; ->set_piomode
> before doing its initial identify etc because there is no guarantee the
> BIOS didn't leave the hardware in a bogus state.

seconded

Bartlomiej