[PATCH RFC] pata_platform: add 8 bit data io support
Wang Jian
lark at linux.net.cn
Mon Oct 13 19:04:24 EST 2008
Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Wang Jian wrote:
>> +static void pata_platform_postreset(struct ata_link *link, unsigned int *classes)
>> +{
>> + struct ata_port *ap = link->ap;
>> + struct ata_device *dev;
>> + u8 select = ATA_DEVICE_OBS;
>> +
>> + /* Call default callback first */
>> + ata_sff_postreset(link, classes);
>> +
>> + if (!(ap->flags & ATA_FLAG_8BIT_DATA))
>> + return;
>> +
>> + /* Set 8-bit mode. We know we can do that */
>> + ata_link_for_each_dev(dev, link) {
>> + if (dev->devno)
>> + select |= ATA_DEV1;
>> +
>> + iowrite8(SETFEATURES_8BIT_ON, ap->ioaddr.feature_addr);
>> + iowrite8(select, ap->ioaddr.device_addr);
>> + iowrite8(ATA_CMD_SET_FEATURES, ap->ioaddr.command_addr);
>
> Aieee... Please don't do this. I think it best belongs to
> ata_dev_configure() or ->dev_config() if you wanna put it in low level
> driver.
>
Good.
I remember the spec states that this setfeature command should be issued
every time reset is issued. This is just a quick and safe hack.
I will look into libata deeper and figure out how to do it better per your
suggestion.
>> @@ -106,7 +159,8 @@ int __devinit __pata_platform_probe(struct device *dev,
>> struct resource *ctl_res,
>> struct resource *irq_res,
>> unsigned int ioport_shift,
>> - int __pio_mask)
>> + int __pio_mask,
>> + unsigned int data_width)
>> {
>> struct ata_host *host;
>> struct ata_port *ap;
>> @@ -140,6 +194,9 @@ int __devinit __pata_platform_probe(struct device *dev,
>> ap->pio_mask = __pio_mask;
>> ap->flags |= ATA_FLAG_SLAVE_POSS;
>>
>> + if (data_width == ATA_DATA_WIDTH_8BIT)
>> + ap->flags |= ATA_FLAG_8BIT_DATA;
>
> It's strange to define ATA_DATA_WIDTH_* constants in ata.h and only
> use it in ata_platform.
I have expressed in another reply that the best place the code belongs to
should be decided first. The usage of flags looks ugly too :)
>
> Overall, I think the bulk of the 8bit PIO implementation should go
> into the libata core layer and transfer width should be property of
> struct ata_device - probably right above or below pio/dma_mode and
> xfer_mode/shift fields.
>
Yes, I agree it'd better go into libata core layer. But for transfer
width, I think it is not belongs to ata_device. It's about how ata
controller wired for data line. (In my case, it is how CF card wired).
Am I wrong?
Best regards
More information about the Linuxppc-dev
mailing list