> > void ata_bmdma_post_internal_cmd(struct ata_queued_cmd *qc)
> > {
> > - ata_bmdma_stop(qc);
> > + if (qc->ap->ioaddr.bmdma_addr)
> > + ata_bmdma_stop(qc);
> > }
>
> But what if the bmdma_addr _is_ zero? Please, let's not allow the "zero
> is not a valid number" braindamage to spread any further than the IRQ
> setup it's already broken.
The fix matches the rest of libata on this and fixes a bug that wants
fixing urgently for 2.6.20.
If you want to put your bmdma address at zero then libata-sff won't help
you at the moment, and assumes zero is a safe "not in use" value because
the PCI layer also takes a similar view in places.
libata-sff and thus ata_bmdma_post_internal_cmd() aren't used by non PCI
devices so the bmdma test is ok providing it stays within libata-sff. I
don't think its a problem, although clearly its an assumption that the
core code rather than the SFF code cannot make.
drivers/ide uses roughly the same assumptions without problem.
Alan
-
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/
