Re: [PATCH libata-dev-2.6 05/05] libata: rework how CCs generated

From: Jeff Garzik
Date: Wed Mar 23 2005 - 00:14:43 EST


Brett Russ wrote:
05_libata_split_ata_to_sense_error.patch

This patch fixes several bugs as well as reorganizes the way
check conditions are generated. Bugs fixed: 1) in
ata_scsi_qc_complete(), ATA_12/16 commands wouldn't call
ata_pass_thru_cc() on error status; 2) ata_pass_thru_cc()
wouldn't put the SK, ASC, and ASCQ from ata_to_sense_error()
in the correct place in the sense block because
ata_to_sense_error() was writing a fixed sense block.

Per the recommendations in the comments, ata_to_sense_error()
is now split into 3 parts. The existing fcn is only used for
outputting a sense key/ASC/ASCQ triplicate. A new function
ata_dump_status() was created to print the error info, similar
to the ide variety. A third function ata_gen_fixed_sense()
was created to generate a fixed length sense block. I added
the use of the info field for 28b LBAs only.
ata_pass_thru_cc() renamed to ata_gen_ata_desc_sense() to
match naming convention, presumably to include another
descriptor format function in the future (see question 2
below).

Questions:

1) I made the ata_gen_..._sense() routines read the status
register themselves rather than use the drv_stat values
that used to be passed in? These values seemed
unreliable/useless since they were often hard coded (see
calls to ata_qc_complete() for origins of most drv_stat
variables). Sound ok?

2) the SAT spec has little about error handling and sense
information, sepcifically what descriptor format is valid
for use by SAT commands. I want to use descriptor type 00
(information) in my next patch until a spec says
differently. Sound ok?

Signed-off-by: Brett Russ <russb@xxxxxxx>

Patch in general is OK, but I would prefer that it be split up a bit more. Suggested split:

* whitespace changes (obscures reviewing the code)
* create and use ata_dump_status()
* the rest of the changes

Regards,

Jeff


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/