From: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <bzolnier@gmail.com>
To: Jeremy Higdon <jeremy@sgi.com>
Cc: Jes Sorensen <jes@sgi.com>, Alan Cox <alan@redhat.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch] SGIIOC4 limit request size
Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2006 13:44:01 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <58cb370e0602010444m46a39705q4a3043778df1628d@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20060201113607.GF152005@sgi.com>
On 2/1/06, Jeremy Higdon <jeremy@sgi.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 01, 2006 at 12:26:26PM +0100, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
> > > I'll send a better patch tomorrow. This one depends on a byte count
> > > multiple of 2. Though according to the chip docs, it ignores bit 0
> > > of the byte count anyway (and the address for that matter). So I
> > > think this is functionally correct. But I think the xcount variable
> > > is superfluous.
> >
> > it seems so
>
> Here's one that removes xcount. It seems to work too.
> Should we set hwif->rqsize to 256, or are we pretty safe in
> expecting that the default won't rise? The driver should be
> able to handle more, but this ioc4 hardware is weird, and it
> probably wouldn't get tested if a general change were made :-)
The current maximum request size is:
* 256 for LBA28 and ATAPI devices
* 1024 for LBA48 devices
The maximum request size allowed by IDE driver for
LBA48 devices will change to 65536 but block layer will
continue to use 1024 as a default maximum request size,
also IIRC sgiioc4 IDE is used only for ATAPI devices.
So I think that there is no need to worry about ->rqsize.
Bartlomiej
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-02-01 12:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-02-01 8:59 [patch] SGIIOC4 limit request size Jes Sorensen
2006-02-01 10:34 ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
2006-02-01 10:41 ` Jes Sorensen
2006-02-01 10:49 ` Jeremy Higdon
2006-02-01 11:08 ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
2006-02-01 11:17 ` Jeremy Higdon
2006-02-01 11:26 ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
2006-02-01 11:36 ` Jeremy Higdon
2006-02-01 12:44 ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz [this message]
2006-02-02 8:00 ` [patch] Fix DMA timeouts with sgiioc4 Jeremy Higdon
2006-02-02 8:45 ` Jes Sorensen
2006-02-01 13:39 ` [patch] SGIIOC4 limit request size Alan Cox
2006-02-01 14:53 ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=58cb370e0602010444m46a39705q4a3043778df1628d@mail.gmail.com \
--to=bzolnier@gmail.com \
--cc=alan@redhat.com \
--cc=jeremy@sgi.com \
--cc=jes@sgi.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=torvalds@osdl.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).