From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Alan Cox Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/20] pata_efar: always program master_data before slave_data Date: Sat, 19 Feb 2011 16:48:11 +0000 Message-ID: <20110219164811.2e90de88@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> References: <20110208122314.19110.4092.sendpatchset@linux-mhg7.site> <20110208122409.19110.4233.sendpatchset@linux-mhg7.site> <20110208130701.19709cc6@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> <20110208132518.300bb098@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> <4D514754.30203@ru.mvista.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-14 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: Received: from earthlight.etchedpixels.co.uk ([81.2.110.250]:46971 "EHLO www.etchedpixels.co.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751117Ab1BSQrO convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Sat, 19 Feb 2011 11:47:14 -0500 In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org To: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz Cc: Sergei Shtylyov , linux-ide@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Jeff Garzik > > =A0 SLC90E66 datasheet only says that SIDETIM register has no effec= t without > > SITRE bit set. Which means the current setup is fine yes ? > Alan, is this explanation sufficient to ACK this patch? (Thanks > Sergei for digging it out.) >=20 > Jeff, would it be possible to queue patches #01-15 for 2.6.39=20 Have they been tested on the relevant hardware yet - I don't believe th= e changes should be made for the untested stuff and you indicated you agreed with that. The tidyups for the easily tested cases (PIIX4 etc) look sensible