>-----Original Message-----
>From: Jeff Garzik [mailto:[email protected]]
>Sent: Friday, September 07, 2007 3:39 PM
>To: Gaston, Jason D
>Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]
>Subject: Re: [PATCH 2.6.23-rc4][reRESEND] ahci: RAID mode SATA patch
for
>Intel Tolapai
>
>Gaston, Jason D wrote:
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Gaston, Jason D
>>> Sent: Friday, August 31, 2007 10:10 AM
>>> To: 'Jeff Garzik'
>>> Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]
>>> Subject: RE: [PATCH 2.6.23-rc4][reRESEND] ahci: RAID mode SATA patch
>> for
>>> Intel Tolapai
>>>
>>> This device has both AHCI and RAID modes that use the ahci driver.
>> Only
>>> the RAID mode DID's are being added as the PCI class code support
will
>>> cover the AHCI mode. Looking at the Generic, PCI class code support
>>> section, it uses "board_ahci". I assumed that they should be the
same
>> as
>>> the generic class code support is working on this platform.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> Jason
>>>
>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Jeff Garzik [mailto:[email protected]]
>>>> Sent: Friday, August 31, 2007 12:47 AM
>>>> To: Gaston, Jason D
>>>> Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]
>>>> Subject: Re: [PATCH 2.6.23-rc4][reRESEND] ahci: RAID mode SATA
patch
>> for
>>>> Intel Tolapai
>>>>
>>>> Jason Gaston wrote:
>>>>> Resend trying to remove 8-bit characters in the email.
>>>>>
>>>>> This patch adds the Intel Tolapai RAID controller DID's for SATA
>>> support.
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Jason Gaston <[email protected]>
>>>>>
>>>>> --- linux-2.6.23-rc4/drivers/ata/ahci.c.orig 2007-08-27
>>>> 18:32:35.000000000 -0700
>>>>> +++ linux-2.6.23-rc4/drivers/ata/ahci.c 2007-08-28
>>> 16:58:11.000000000 -
>>>> 0700
>>>>> @@ -411,6 +411,8 @@
>>>>> { PCI_VDEVICE(INTEL, 0x292f), board_ahci_pi }, /* ICH9M */
>>>>> { PCI_VDEVICE(INTEL, 0x294d), board_ahci_pi }, /* ICH9 */
>>>>> { PCI_VDEVICE(INTEL, 0x294e), board_ahci_pi }, /* ICH9M */
>>>>> + { PCI_VDEVICE(INTEL, 0x502a), board_ahci }, /* Tolapai */
>>>>> + { PCI_VDEVICE(INTEL, 0x502b), board_ahci }, /* Tolapai */
>>>> Why did you not use board_ahci_pi? Is the AHCI ports-implemented
>>>> register unreliable on this platform?
>>
>> Jeff,
>>
>> Do I need to change this to board_ahci_pi or is it ok to leave it at
>> board_ahci, which will be used by the AHCI class code devices?
>
>You are the one who needs to answer this question ;-)
>
>Most new Intel AHCI have a sane and reliable Ports-Implemented register
>value even across reset, unlike earlier ones or some clones. For
those,
>we use board_ahci_pi.
>
>If PI is not reliable across reset or if BIOS is absent (yes we care
>about that case, when we do our own PCI resume for example), then you
>should use board_ahci.
>
> Jeff
At this time, I don't have any way to test those particular DeviceID's
and I know that the AHCI mode DeviceID works by using the class code
support. So, I would like to just leave them at they are, if that is
ok.
Thanks,
Jason
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
