The AT91SAM9 microcontrollers with master clock higher then 105 MHz
and PIO0, have overflow of the NCS_RD_PULSE value in the MSB. This
lead to "NCS_RD_PULSE" pulse longer then "NRD_CYCLE" pulse and driver
does not detect ATA device.
Signed-off-by: Igor Plyatov <[email protected]>
---
drivers/ata/pata_at91.c | 11 +++++++++--
1 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/ata/pata_at91.c b/drivers/ata/pata_at91.c
index 0da0dcc..a462405 100644
--- a/drivers/ata/pata_at91.c
+++ b/drivers/ata/pata_at91.c
@@ -33,12 +33,14 @@
#define DRV_NAME "pata_at91"
-#define DRV_VERSION "0.1"
+#define DRV_VERSION "0.2"
#define CF_IDE_OFFSET 0x00c00000
#define CF_ALT_IDE_OFFSET 0x00e00000
#define CF_IDE_RES_SIZE 0x08
+#define NCS_RD_PULSE_LIMIT 0x3f /* maximal value for pulse bitfields */
+
struct at91_ide_info {
unsigned long mode;
unsigned int cs;
@@ -50,7 +52,7 @@ struct at91_ide_info {
};
static const struct ata_timing initial_timing =
- {XFER_PIO_0, 70, 290, 240, 600, 165, 150, 600, 0};
+ {XFER_PIO_0, 70, 290, 240, 600, 165, 150, 0, 600, 0};
static unsigned long calc_mck_cycles(unsigned long ns, unsigned long mck_hz)
{
@@ -109,6 +111,11 @@ static void set_smc_timing(struct device *dev,
/* (CS0, CS1, DIR, OE) <= (CFCE1, CFCE2, CFRNW, NCSX) timings */
ncs_read_setup = 1;
ncs_read_pulse = read_cycle - 2;
+ if (ncs_read_pulse > NCS_RD_PULSE_LIMIT) {
+ ncs_read_pulse = NCS_RD_PULSE_LIMIT;
+ dev_warn(dev, "ncs_read_pulse limited to maximal value %lu\n",
+ ncs_read_pulse);
+ }
/* Write timings same as read timings */
write_cycle = read_cycle;
--
1.7.0.4
On 12/11/2010 03:37 PM, Igor Plyatov wrote:
> The AT91SAM9 microcontrollers with master clock higher then 105 MHz
> and PIO0, have overflow of the NCS_RD_PULSE value in the MSB. This
> lead to "NCS_RD_PULSE" pulse longer then "NRD_CYCLE" pulse and driver
> does not detect ATA device.
>
> Signed-off-by: Igor Plyatov<[email protected]>
Thanks, queued (absent further comments...)
Hello.
On 11-12-2010 23:37, Igor Plyatov wrote:
> The AT91SAM9 microcontrollers with master clock higher then 105 MHz
> and PIO0, have overflow of the NCS_RD_PULSE value in the MSB. This
> lead to "NCS_RD_PULSE" pulse longer then "NRD_CYCLE" pulse and driver
> does not detect ATA device.
> Signed-off-by: Igor Plyatov<[email protected]>
[...]
> diff --git a/drivers/ata/pata_at91.c b/drivers/ata/pata_at91.c
> index 0da0dcc..a462405 100644
> --- a/drivers/ata/pata_at91.c
> +++ b/drivers/ata/pata_at91.c
[...]
> @@ -50,7 +52,7 @@ struct at91_ide_info {
> };
>
> static const struct ata_timing initial_timing =
> - {XFER_PIO_0, 70, 290, 240, 600, 165, 150, 600, 0};
> + {XFER_PIO_0, 70, 290, 240, 600, 165, 150, 0, 600, 0};
BTW, you haven't described this in the changelog...
WBR, Sergei
Dear Sergei,
> Hello.
>
> On 11-12-2010 23:37, Igor Plyatov wrote:
>
> > The AT91SAM9 microcontrollers with master clock higher then 105 MHz
> > and PIO0, have overflow of the NCS_RD_PULSE value in the MSB. This
> > lead to "NCS_RD_PULSE" pulse longer then "NRD_CYCLE" pulse and driver
> > does not detect ATA device.
>
> > Signed-off-by: Igor Plyatov<[email protected]>
> [...]
Please use more descriptive comments, because it is not clear what you
mean here. Maybe here you just cut a text...
It is so strange to cut such small amount of text and I does not have
any idea why here is "[...]" exists.
> > diff --git a/drivers/ata/pata_at91.c b/drivers/ata/pata_at91.c
> > index 0da0dcc..a462405 100644
> > --- a/drivers/ata/pata_at91.c
> > +++ b/drivers/ata/pata_at91.c
> [...]
The same as above. Nobody are able to read you mind on the distance :-)
> > @@ -50,7 +52,7 @@ struct at91_ide_info {
> > };
> >
> > static const struct ata_timing initial_timing =
> > - {XFER_PIO_0, 70, 290, 240, 600, 165, 150, 600, 0};
> > + {XFER_PIO_0, 70, 290, 240, 600, 165, 150, 0, 600, 0};
>
> BTW, you haven't described this in the changelog...
Here is just a typo fixed for the ata_timing structure. This typo does
not have influence on the driver operation, but I do not like to leave
such a negligible problem as it is.
> WBR, Sergei
Best regards!
--
Igor Plyatov
Hello.
On 12-12-2010 22:02, Igor Plyatov wrote:
>>> The AT91SAM9 microcontrollers with master clock higher then 105 MHz
>>> and PIO0, have overflow of the NCS_RD_PULSE value in the MSB. This
>>> lead to "NCS_RD_PULSE" pulse longer then "NRD_CYCLE" pulse and driver
>>> does not detect ATA device.
>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Igor Plyatov<[email protected]>
>> [...]
> Please use more descriptive comments, because it is not clear what you
> mean here. Maybe here you just cut a text...
Exactly, this is how I mark the cut out text.
> It is so strange to cut such small amount of text and I does not have
> any idea why here is "[...]" exists.
Well, it's still better than leaving large patches quoted and uncommented,
having only one comment at the top, as some people do. :-)
>>> diff --git a/drivers/ata/pata_at91.c b/drivers/ata/pata_at91.c
>>> index 0da0dcc..a462405 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/ata/pata_at91.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/ata/pata_at91.c
>> [...]
> The same as above. Nobody are able to read you mind on the distance :-)
It's the first time anybody tried to iterpret my [...] marks as comments. :-)
>>> @@ -50,7 +52,7 @@ struct at91_ide_info {
>>> };
>>>
>>> static const struct ata_timing initial_timing =
>>> - {XFER_PIO_0, 70, 290, 240, 600, 165, 150, 600, 0};
>>> + {XFER_PIO_0, 70, 290, 240, 600, 165, 150, 0, 600, 0};
>> BTW, you haven't described this in the changelog...
> Here is just a typo fixed for the ata_timing structure. This typo does
> not have influence on the driver operation, but I do not like to leave
> such a negligible problem as it is.
You at least should have noted that in the changelog. And as the change is
unrelated to the other changes you're doing, it's a good practice to put it
into a separate patch.
>> WBR, Sergei
> Best regards!
> --
> Igor Plyatov
WBR, Sergei
On 12/13/2010 06:02 AM, Sergei Shtylyov wrote:
> On 12-12-2010 22:02, Igor Plyatov wrote:
>>>> static const struct ata_timing initial_timing =
>>>> - {XFER_PIO_0, 70, 290, 240, 600, 165, 150, 600, 0};
>>>> + {XFER_PIO_0, 70, 290, 240, 600, 165, 150, 0, 600, 0};
>
>>> BTW, you haven't described this in the changelog...
>
>> Here is just a typo fixed for the ata_timing structure. This typo does
>> not have influence on the driver operation, but I do not like to leave
>> such a negligible problem as it is.
>
> You at least should have noted that in the changelog. And as the change
> is unrelated to the other changes you're doing, it's a good practice to
> put it into a separate patch.
Agreed...