From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Martin K. Petersen" Subject: Re: [PATCH 5 of 8] sd: Detect non-rotational devices Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2009 09:16:05 -0400 Message-ID: References: <20090423105245.GX4593@kernel.dk> <49F04C71.6050304@garzik.org> <20090423113841.GK1926@parisc-linux.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from rcsinet11.oracle.com ([148.87.113.123]:61033 "EHLO rgminet11.oracle.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754007AbZDWNVy (ORCPT ); Thu, 23 Apr 2009 09:21:54 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20090423113841.GK1926@parisc-linux.org> (Matthew Wilcox's message of "Thu, 23 Apr 2009 05:38:41 -0600") Sender: linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org To: Matthew Wilcox Cc: Jeff Garzik , Jens Axboe , "Martin K. Petersen" , rwheeler@redhat.com, snitzer@redhat.com, neilb@suse.de, James.Bottomley@hansenpartnership.com, dgilbert@interlog.com, linux-ide@vger.kernel.org, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org >>>>> "Matthew" == Matthew Wilcox writes: Matthew> I already did that. The only problem is that you made me Matthew> include the stupid: Matthew> if (ata_id_major_version(args->id) > 7) { Matthew> so of course it doesn't work on any existing hardware. How Matthew> about applying this patch: Maybe we could incubate your patch in the next tree for a bit and see what breaks without the version check? We could even be somewhat conservative like we were with RC16 in SCSI. The SATA devices I have here with valid rotational flags all report version 7. I wonder if > 6 do the trick? -- Martin K. Petersen Oracle Linux Engineering