Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner+willy=40w.ods.org@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id <S318991AbSHWRxC>; Fri, 23 Aug 2002 13:53:02 -0400
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org
	id <S319007AbSHWRxB>; Fri, 23 Aug 2002 13:53:01 -0400
Received: from astound-64-85-224-253.ca.astound.net ([64.85.224.253]:26377
	"EHLO master.linux-ide.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id <S318991AbSHWRxB>; Fri, 23 Aug 2002 13:53:01 -0400
Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2002 10:42:43 -0700 (PDT)
From: Andre Hedrick <andre@linux-ide.org>
To: Russell King <rmk@arm.linux.org.uk>
cc: "Adam J. Richter" <adam@yggdrasil.com>, jgarzik@mandrakesoft.com,
       ebiederm@xmission.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: IDE-flash device and hard disk on same controller
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10208231002220.14761-100000@master.linux-ide.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10208231040200.14761-100000@master.linux-ide.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1776
Lines: 45

On Fri, 23 Aug 2002, Andre Hedrick wrote:

> On Fri, 23 Aug 2002, Russell King wrote:
> 
> > On Fri, Aug 23, 2002 at 12:45:03AM -0700, Andre Hedrick wrote:
> > > This is where JG's hard work and my time with him explaining it will help
> > > most.  Also case where RMK's ARM toys do fun things and the assumption by
> > > the driver that POST is valid is DEAD WRONG.  I will repeat the assumption
> > > of my code about POST is DEAD WRONG!  POST like events happen at different
> > > times for various archs.
> > 
> > Yet more FUD.  Andre - go away and come back once you've calmed down.
> > 
> > Maybe its because you don't actually understand my IDE hardware.  I
> > dunno.  But you are "DEAD WRONG" about the crap you've written above.
> > 
> > Completely.
> 
> NO, I just misreferenced you because you was asked to help in a situation
> with G Britton, as you have refreshed my memory with a hammer.
> 
> So I apologize for mixing events and people.
> 
> The point still stands, there are case where the OS is launched,
> regardless of bootloading, where devices can be lost if the time limits
> are not followed.  In the case where my memory failed, you reminded me the
> device took 40 secs to spinup.

Oh I forgot to add, I said "POST-Like" events.
If Execute Diagnostics is never issues w/ the prior reset of the
devices/bus we do not have a quantified state the system should be left in
at bootloading.

Therefore I suspect the device is compliant and the HOST is bad.

Cheers,

Andre Hedrick
LAD Storage Consulting Group

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/