login
Login
/
Register
Search
Search this site:
Forums
News
Blogs
Features
Site
Home
»
Mailing list archives
»
linux-kernel
»
2010
»
December
»
8
Re: questions regarding possible violation of AHCI spec in AHCI driver
view
thread
Previous message: [
thread
] [
date
] [
author
]
Next message: [
thread
] [
date
] [
author
]
[view in full thread]
From: Robert Hancock
Subject:
Re: questions regarding possible violation of AHCI spec in AHCI driver
Date: Tuesday, December 7, 2010 - 6:54 pm
CCing linux-ide and Tejun. On 12/07/2010 01:43 AM, Jian Peng wrote:
quoted text
> Recently, while bringing up a new AHCI host controller, I found out that current AHCI driver (in 2.6.37-rc3) may violate AHCI spec in function libahci.c: ahci_start_engine(). > > From end of section 10.1.2 in AHCI 1.3 spec, it claims > > Software shall not set PxCMD.ST to '1' until it is determined that a functional device is present on the port > as determined by PxTFD.STS.BSY = '0', PxTFD.STS.DRQ = '0', and PxSSTS.DET = 3h. > > It seems working well on most controller without this extra checking, but does cause problem in our new core. Since toggling PxCMD.SUD already initiated reset process at early time, and by the time of ahci_start_engine() got called, BSY bit may not be cleared yet, and forcing PxCMD.ST bit to 1 will cause problem for HW in this case. > > Since I do not know all history about AHCI driver, I really hope that AHCI driver and libata maintainer can comment on this.
Seems like a valid point to me, according to the spec. I'm guessing it just hasn't come up previously with other controllers? --
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to
majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at
http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at
http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Previous message: [
thread
] [
date
] [
author
]
Next message: [
thread
] [
date
] [
author
]
Messages in current thread:
questions regarding possible violation of AHCI spec in AHC ...
, Jian Peng
, (Tue Dec 7, 12:43 am)
Re: questions regarding possible violation of AHCI spec in ...
, Robert Hancock
, (Tue Dec 7, 6:54 pm)
Re: questions regarding possible violation of AHCI spec in ...
, Tejun Heo
, (Wed Dec 8, 3:07 am)
RE: questions regarding possible violation of AHCI spec in ...
, Jian Peng
, (Wed Dec 8, 11:14 am)
Re: questions regarding possible violation of AHCI spec in ...
, Tejun Heo
, (Wed Dec 8, 11:24 am)
RE: questions regarding possible violation of AHCI spec in ...
, Jian Peng
, (Wed Dec 8, 11:48 am)
Re: questions regarding possible violation of AHCI spec in ...
, Tejun Heo
, (Wed Dec 8, 11:52 am)
RE: questions regarding possible violation of AHCI spec in ...
, Jian Peng
, (Wed Dec 8, 12:49 pm)
Re: questions regarding possible violation of AHCI spec in ...
, Tejun Heo
, (Wed Dec 8, 12:55 pm)
RE: questions regarding possible violation of AHCI spec in ...
, Jian Peng
, (Wed Dec 8, 1:09 pm)
Re: questions regarding possible violation of AHCI spec in ...
, Tejun Heo
, (Wed Dec 8, 3:54 pm)
RE: questions regarding possible violation of AHCI spec in ...
, Jian Peng
, (Wed Dec 8, 6:30 pm)
Navigation