2011-03-28 11:59:28

by Igor Plyatov

Subject: [PATCH] ata: pata_at91.c bugfix for initial_timing initialisation

The "struct ata_timing" must contain 10 members, but ".dmack_hold" member was
forgotten for "initial_timing" initialisation. This patch fixes such a problem.

Signed-off-by: Igor Plyatov <[email protected]>
---
drivers/ata/pata_at91.c | 5 +++--
1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/ata/pata_at91.c b/drivers/ata/pata_at91.c
index 0da0dcc..d1aaeb5 100644
--- a/drivers/ata/pata_at91.c
+++ b/drivers/ata/pata_at91.c
@@ -49,8 +49,9 @@ struct at91_ide_info {
void __iomem *alt_addr;
};

-static const struct ata_timing initial_timing =
- {XFER_PIO_0, 70, 290, 240, 600, 165, 150, 600, 0};
+static const struct ata_timing initial_timing = {
+ XFER_PIO_0, 70, 290, 240, 600, 165, 150, 600, 0
+};

static unsigned long calc_mck_cycles(unsigned long ns, unsigned long mck_hz)
{
--
1.7.1

2011-03-28 12:09:36

by Eric Dumazet

Subject: Re: [PATCH] ata: pata_at91.c bugfix for initial_timing initialisation

Le lundi 28 mars 2011 à 15:59 +0400, Igor Plyatov a écrit :
> The "struct ata_timing" must contain 10 members, but ".dmack_hold" member was
> forgotten for "initial_timing" initialisation. This patch fixes such a problem.
>
> Signed-off-by: Igor Plyatov <[email protected]>
> ---
> drivers/ata/pata_at91.c | 5 +++--
> 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/ata/pata_at91.c b/drivers/ata/pata_at91.c
> index 0da0dcc..d1aaeb5 100644
> --- a/drivers/ata/pata_at91.c
> +++ b/drivers/ata/pata_at91.c
> @@ -49,8 +49,9 @@ struct at91_ide_info {
> void __iomem *alt_addr;
> };
>
> -static const struct ata_timing initial_timing =
> - {XFER_PIO_0, 70, 290, 240, 600, 165, 150, 600, 0};
> +static const struct ata_timing initial_timing = {
> + XFER_PIO_0, 70, 290, 240, 600, 165, 150, 600, 0

Oh well.

XFER_PIO_0, 70, 290, 240, 600, 165, 150, 0, 600, 0

Or even better, use C99 initializer ?

2011-03-28 12:10:31

by Sergei Shtylyov

Subject: Re: [PATCH] ata: pata_at91.c bugfix for initial_timing initialisation

Hello.

Igor Plyatov wrote:

> The "struct ata_timing" must contain 10 members, but ".dmack_hold" member was
> forgotten for "initial_timing" initialisation. This patch fixes such a problem.

> Signed-off-by: Igor Plyatov <[email protected]>
> ---
> drivers/ata/pata_at91.c | 5 +++--
> 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

> diff --git a/drivers/ata/pata_at91.c b/drivers/ata/pata_at91.c
> index 0da0dcc..d1aaeb5 100644
> --- a/drivers/ata/pata_at91.c
> +++ b/drivers/ata/pata_at91.c
> @@ -49,8 +49,9 @@ struct at91_ide_info {
> void __iomem *alt_addr;
> };
>
> -static const struct ata_timing initial_timing =
> - {XFER_PIO_0, 70, 290, 240, 600, 165, 150, 600, 0};
> +static const struct ata_timing initial_timing = {
> + XFER_PIO_0, 70, 290, 240, 600, 165, 150, 600, 0
> +};

Frankly, I don't see any difference.

WBR, Sergei

2011-03-28 13:01:24

by Igor Plyatov

Subject: Re: [PATCH] ata: pata_at91.c bugfix for initial_timing initialisation

Dear Sergei and Eric,

It's so stupid from my side to send broken patch, but it happens :-)

Please, look at new my e-mails with subjects:
* "[PATCH v4 1/2] ata: pata_at91.c bugfix for initial_timing
initialisation"
* "[PATCH v4 2/2] ata: pata_at91.c bugfix for high master clock"

Best regards!
--
Igor Plyatov

> Hello.
>
> Igor Plyatov wrote:
>
> > The "struct ata_timing" must contain 10 members, but ".dmack_hold" member was
> > forgotten for "initial_timing" initialisation. This patch fixes such a problem.
>
> > Signed-off-by: Igor Plyatov <[email protected]>
> > ---
> > drivers/ata/pata_at91.c | 5 +++--
> > 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> > diff --git a/drivers/ata/pata_at91.c b/drivers/ata/pata_at91.c
> > index 0da0dcc..d1aaeb5 100644
> > --- a/drivers/ata/pata_at91.c
> > +++ b/drivers/ata/pata_at91.c
> > @@ -49,8 +49,9 @@ struct at91_ide_info {
> > void __iomem *alt_addr;
> > };
> >
> > -static const struct ata_timing initial_timing =
> > - {XFER_PIO_0, 70, 290, 240, 600, 165, 150, 600, 0};
> > +static const struct ata_timing initial_timing = {
> > + XFER_PIO_0, 70, 290, 240, 600, 165, 150, 600, 0
> > +};
>
> Frankly, I don't see any difference.
>
> WBR, Sergei