Re: [patch libata-dev-2.6 1/1] libata: sync SMART ioctls with ATA pass thru spec (T10/04-262r7)
Douglas Gilbert wrote: Hopefully these matters will be sorted out at the next t10 meeting in March. So that means I have to hold off releasing SMART support for SATA for yet another couple months? Oh well... Jeff - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [patch libata-dev-2.6 1/1] libata: sync SMART ioctls with ATA pass thru spec (T10/04-262r7)
Jens Axboe wrote: > > > > -/* Temporary values for T10/04-262 until official values are > allocated */ > > -#define ATA_160x85 /* 16-byte pass-thru > [0x85 == unused]*/ > -#define ATA_120xb3 /* 12-byte pass-thru > [0xb3 == obsolete set limits command] */ > > +/* Values for T10/04-262r7 */ > > +#define ATA_160x85 /* 16-byte pass-thru */ > > +#define ATA_120xa1 /* 12-byte pass-thru */ > > Ehh are you sure that is correct? 0xa1 is the BLANK command, I would > hate to think there would be a collision like that. That very point came up recently in a MMC meeting: http://www.t10.org/ftp/t10/document.05/05-056r0.pdf To confuse things further "ATA_16" is shown as opcode 0x98 in the latest draft of SPC-3 (rev 21c 15 January 2005) http://www.t10.org/ftp/t10/drafts/spc3/spc3r21c.pdf [annex D.3.1]. Hopefully these matters will be sorted out at the next t10 meeting in March. Doug Gilbert - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [patch libata-dev-2.6 1/1] libata: sync SMART ioctls with ATA pass thru spec (T10/04-262r7)
On Wed, Feb 02, 2005 at 07:51:22PM +0100, Jens Axboe wrote: > On Wed, Feb 02 2005, John W. Linville wrote: > > -/* Temporary values for T10/04-262 until official values are allocated */ > > -#defineATA_160x85 /* 16-byte pass-thru [0x85 == > > unused]*/ > > -#defineATA_120xb3 /* 12-byte pass-thru [0xb3 == > > obsolete set limits command] */ > > +/* Values for T10/04-262r7 */ > > +#defineATA_160x85 /* 16-byte pass-thru */ > > +#defineATA_120xa1 /* 12-byte pass-thru */ > > Ehh are you sure that is correct? 0xa1 is the BLANK command, I would > hate to think there would be a collision like that. Well, I'm sure that is what is in T10/04-262r7 in Table 1 on Page 1. The spec is available here: http://www.t10.org/ftp/t10/document.04/04-262r7.pdf Previous versions of the spec did not specify a value. As to whether or not the current spec is in error, hopefully Curtis can elablorate? John -- John W. Linville [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [patch libata-dev-2.6 1/1] libata: sync SMART ioctls with ATA pass thru spec (T10/04-262r7)
On Wed, Feb 02 2005, John W. Linville wrote:
> Update libata's SMART-related ioctl handlers to match the current
> ATA command pass-through specification (T10/04-262r7). Also change
> related SCSI op-code definition to match current spec.
>
> Signed-off-by: John W. Linville <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> ---
> Contact w/ spec author (Curtis Stevens @ Western Digital) indicates
> that while a revision 8 of the spec is expected, that it is really
> only a re-formatting of the text to match T10 requirements. According
> to Stevens, revision 8 is expected to be the last version of the spec.
>
> drivers/scsi/libata-scsi.c |6 --
> include/scsi/scsi.h|6 +++---
> 2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> --- sata-smart-2.6/drivers/scsi/libata-scsi.c.orig2005-02-01
> 16:24:01.687622085 -0500
> +++ sata-smart-2.6/drivers/scsi/libata-scsi.c 2005-02-01 16:49:18.213876086
> -0500
> @@ -109,14 +109,16 @@ int ata_cmd_ioctl(struct scsi_device *sc
> return -ENOMEM;
>
> scsi_cmd[1] = (4 << 1); /* PIO Data-in */
> + scsi_cmd[2] = 0x0e; /* no off.line or cc, read from dev,
> + block count in sector count field */
> sreq->sr_data_direction = DMA_FROM_DEVICE;
> } else {
> scsi_cmd[1] = (3 << 1); /* Non-data */
> + /* scsi_cmd[2] is already 0 -- no off.line, cc, or data xfer */
> sreq->sr_data_direction = DMA_NONE;
> }
>
> scsi_cmd[0] = ATA_16;
> - scsi_cmd[2] = 0x1f; /* no off.line or cc, yes all registers */
>
> scsi_cmd[4] = args[2];
> if (args[0] == WIN_SMART) { /* hack -- ide driver does this too... */
> @@ -179,7 +181,7 @@ int ata_task_ioctl(struct scsi_device *s
> memset(scsi_cmd, 0, sizeof(scsi_cmd));
> scsi_cmd[0] = ATA_16;
> scsi_cmd[1] = (3 << 1); /* Non-data */
> - scsi_cmd[2] = 0x1f; /* no off.line or cc, yes all registers */
> + /* scsi_cmd[2] is already 0 -- no off.line, cc, or data xfer */
> scsi_cmd[4] = args[1];
> scsi_cmd[6] = args[2];
> scsi_cmd[8] = args[3];
> --- sata-smart-2.6/include/scsi/scsi.h.orig 2005-02-01 16:22:12.390234346
> -0500
> +++ sata-smart-2.6/include/scsi/scsi.h2005-02-01 16:23:02.828491161
> -0500
> @@ -113,9 +113,9 @@ extern const char *const scsi_device_typ
> /* values for service action in */
> #define SAI_READ_CAPACITY_16 0x10
>
> -/* Temporary values for T10/04-262 until official values are allocated */
> -#define ATA_160x85 /* 16-byte pass-thru [0x85 ==
> unused]*/
> -#define ATA_120xb3 /* 12-byte pass-thru [0xb3 ==
> obsolete set limits command] */
> +/* Values for T10/04-262r7 */
> +#define ATA_160x85 /* 16-byte pass-thru */
> +#define ATA_120xa1 /* 12-byte pass-thru */
Ehh are you sure that is correct? 0xa1 is the BLANK command, I would
hate to think there would be a collision like that.
--
Jens Axboe
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [patch libata-dev-2.6 1/1] libata: sync SMART ioctls with ATA pass thru spec (T10/04-262r7)
On Wed, Feb 02 2005, John W. Linville wrote:
Update libata's SMART-related ioctl handlers to match the current
ATA command pass-through specification (T10/04-262r7). Also change
related SCSI op-code definition to match current spec.
Signed-off-by: John W. Linville [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
Contact w/ spec author (Curtis Stevens @ Western Digital) indicates
that while a revision 8 of the spec is expected, that it is really
only a re-formatting of the text to match T10 requirements. According
to Stevens, revision 8 is expected to be the last version of the spec.
drivers/scsi/libata-scsi.c |6 --
include/scsi/scsi.h|6 +++---
2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
--- sata-smart-2.6/drivers/scsi/libata-scsi.c.orig2005-02-01
16:24:01.687622085 -0500
+++ sata-smart-2.6/drivers/scsi/libata-scsi.c 2005-02-01 16:49:18.213876086
-0500
@@ -109,14 +109,16 @@ int ata_cmd_ioctl(struct scsi_device *sc
return -ENOMEM;
scsi_cmd[1] = (4 1); /* PIO Data-in */
+ scsi_cmd[2] = 0x0e; /* no off.line or cc, read from dev,
+ block count in sector count field */
sreq-sr_data_direction = DMA_FROM_DEVICE;
} else {
scsi_cmd[1] = (3 1); /* Non-data */
+ /* scsi_cmd[2] is already 0 -- no off.line, cc, or data xfer */
sreq-sr_data_direction = DMA_NONE;
}
scsi_cmd[0] = ATA_16;
- scsi_cmd[2] = 0x1f; /* no off.line or cc, yes all registers */
scsi_cmd[4] = args[2];
if (args[0] == WIN_SMART) { /* hack -- ide driver does this too... */
@@ -179,7 +181,7 @@ int ata_task_ioctl(struct scsi_device *s
memset(scsi_cmd, 0, sizeof(scsi_cmd));
scsi_cmd[0] = ATA_16;
scsi_cmd[1] = (3 1); /* Non-data */
- scsi_cmd[2] = 0x1f; /* no off.line or cc, yes all registers */
+ /* scsi_cmd[2] is already 0 -- no off.line, cc, or data xfer */
scsi_cmd[4] = args[1];
scsi_cmd[6] = args[2];
scsi_cmd[8] = args[3];
--- sata-smart-2.6/include/scsi/scsi.h.orig 2005-02-01 16:22:12.390234346
-0500
+++ sata-smart-2.6/include/scsi/scsi.h2005-02-01 16:23:02.828491161
-0500
@@ -113,9 +113,9 @@ extern const char *const scsi_device_typ
/* values for service action in */
#define SAI_READ_CAPACITY_16 0x10
-/* Temporary values for T10/04-262 until official values are allocated */
-#define ATA_160x85 /* 16-byte pass-thru [0x85 ==
unused]*/
-#define ATA_120xb3 /* 12-byte pass-thru [0xb3 ==
obsolete set limits command] */
+/* Values for T10/04-262r7 */
+#define ATA_160x85 /* 16-byte pass-thru */
+#define ATA_120xa1 /* 12-byte pass-thru */
Ehh are you sure that is correct? 0xa1 is the BLANK command, I would
hate to think there would be a collision like that.
--
Jens Axboe
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [patch libata-dev-2.6 1/1] libata: sync SMART ioctls with ATA pass thru spec (T10/04-262r7)
On Wed, Feb 02, 2005 at 07:51:22PM +0100, Jens Axboe wrote: On Wed, Feb 02 2005, John W. Linville wrote: -/* Temporary values for T10/04-262 until official values are allocated */ -#defineATA_160x85 /* 16-byte pass-thru [0x85 == unused]*/ -#defineATA_120xb3 /* 12-byte pass-thru [0xb3 == obsolete set limits command] */ +/* Values for T10/04-262r7 */ +#defineATA_160x85 /* 16-byte pass-thru */ +#defineATA_120xa1 /* 12-byte pass-thru */ Ehh are you sure that is correct? 0xa1 is the BLANK command, I would hate to think there would be a collision like that. Well, I'm sure that is what is in T10/04-262r7 in Table 1 on Page 1. The spec is available here: http://www.t10.org/ftp/t10/document.04/04-262r7.pdf Previous versions of the spec did not specify a value. As to whether or not the current spec is in error, hopefully Curtis can elablorate? John -- John W. Linville [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [patch libata-dev-2.6 1/1] libata: sync SMART ioctls with ATA pass thru spec (T10/04-262r7)
Jens Axboe wrote: snip -/* Temporary values for T10/04-262 until official values are allocated */ -#define ATA_160x85 /* 16-byte pass-thru [0x85 == unused]*/ -#define ATA_120xb3 /* 12-byte pass-thru [0xb3 == obsolete set limits command] */ +/* Values for T10/04-262r7 */ +#define ATA_160x85 /* 16-byte pass-thru */ +#define ATA_120xa1 /* 12-byte pass-thru */ Ehh are you sure that is correct? 0xa1 is the BLANK command, I would hate to think there would be a collision like that. That very point came up recently in a MMC meeting: http://www.t10.org/ftp/t10/document.05/05-056r0.pdf To confuse things further ATA_16 is shown as opcode 0x98 in the latest draft of SPC-3 (rev 21c 15 January 2005) http://www.t10.org/ftp/t10/drafts/spc3/spc3r21c.pdf [annex D.3.1]. Hopefully these matters will be sorted out at the next t10 meeting in March. Doug Gilbert - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [patch libata-dev-2.6 1/1] libata: sync SMART ioctls with ATA pass thru spec (T10/04-262r7)
Douglas Gilbert wrote: Hopefully these matters will be sorted out at the next t10 meeting in March. So that means I have to hold off releasing SMART support for SATA for yet another couple months? Oh well... Jeff - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
