Re: [PATCH v2.6.38-rc7] Revert "libata: ahci_start_engine compliant to AHCI spec"

From: Jian Peng <jipeng2005@gmail.com>
To: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu
Cc: Michael Leun <lkml20100708@newton.leun.net>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	linux-ide@vger.kernel.org, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
	Linux PM mailing list <linux-pm@lists.linux-foundation.org>,
	Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@pobox.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2.6.38-rc7] Revert "libata: ahci_start_engine compliant to AHCI spec"
Date: Sat, 21 May 2011 19:00:26 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <BANLkTimnfJmMWmSkFiehNeE95z7kxgeQPw__22431.0341327966$1306029701$gmane$org@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <17610.1305915959@localhost>

HI, Valdis,

This patch is on top of reverted patch 81ca7e4. So you should not
revert 81ca7e4 before applying this new one.

Best regards,
Jian

On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 11:25 AM, <Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 20 May 2011 10:02:56 PDT, Jian Peng said:
> > --20cf307f38f6d842a904a3b81730
>
> > You are both right that adding this majic 5ms delay at this place should not
> > be the final solution.
> >
> > If this magic 5ms delay works on other affected systems, I plan to post a
> > new patch that inside ahci_start_engine(), still perform same check, and
> > show warning message if failed, but will set a flag, then still set START
> > bit, and if there is such failure flag, add 5ms delay.
> >
> > Valdis, could you apply the following patch and retest it?
>
> I should be able to do that this weekend.  To clarify - should this be with the
> problem commit 270dac35c26433d06a89150c51e75ca0181ca7e4 applied, or reverted?
>