From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262313AbTEIGxu (ORCPT ); Fri, 9 May 2003 02:53:50 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262303AbTEIGxu (ORCPT ); Fri, 9 May 2003 02:53:50 -0400 Received: from ns.virtualhost.dk ([195.184.98.160]:33239 "EHLO virtualhost.dk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262313AbTEIGxu (ORCPT ); Fri, 9 May 2003 02:53:50 -0400 Date: Fri, 9 May 2003 09:06:23 +0200 From: Jens Axboe To: Alan Cox Cc: Linus Torvalds , Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz , Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: [PATCH] 2.5 ide 48-bit usage Message-ID: <20030509070623.GV20941@suse.de> References: <20030508161600.GE20941@suse.de> <20030508163441.GG20941@suse.de> <1052431594.13567.30.camel@dhcp22.swansea.linux.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1052431594.13567.30.camel@dhcp22.swansea.linux.org.uk> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, May 08 2003, Alan Cox wrote: > On Iau, 2003-05-08 at 17:34, Jens Axboe wrote: > > Might not be a bad idea, drive->address_mode is a heck of a lot more to > > the point. I'll do a swipe of this tomorrow, if no one beats me to it. > > We don't know if in the future drives will support some random mask of modes. > Would > > drive->lba48 > drive->lba96 > drive->.. > > be safer ? I had the same thought yesterday, that just because a device does lba89 does not need it supports all of the lower modes. How about just using the drive->address_mode as a supported field of modes? if (drive->address_mode & IDE_LBA48) lba48 = 1; -- Jens Axboe