On Sun, 14 Oct 2007 13:31:34 -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> Mikael Pettersson wrote:
> > On Thu, 16 Aug 2007 21:19:40 +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
> Unfortunately this breaks pata_pdc2027x on my PowerMac G3:
> >>> Did this ever get resolved?
> >> All went quiet so I assume its gone away ?
> >
> > -ENO
Mikael Pettersson wrote:
On Thu, 16 Aug 2007 21:19:40 +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
Unfortunately this breaks pata_pdc2027x on my PowerMac G3:
Did this ever get resolved?
All went quiet so I assume its gone away ?
-ENOTIME
The regression is still there in 2.6.23-rc3 (I just checked),
but I haven't
On Thu, 16 Aug 2007 21:19:40 +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
> > > Unfortunately this breaks pata_pdc2027x on my PowerMac G3:
> >
> > Did this ever get resolved?
>
> All went quiet so I assume its gone away ?
-ENOTIME
The regression is still there in 2.6.23-rc3 (I just checked),
but I haven't had time t
> > Unfortunately this breaks pata_pdc2027x on my PowerMac G3:
>
> Did this ever get resolved?
All went quiet so I assume its gone away ?
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ide" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel
Mikael Pettersson wrote:
(cc:ing linuxppc-dev)
On Tue, 26 Jun 2007 13:43:15 +0800, Albert Lee wrote:
Recently the PLL input clock of pata_pdc2027x is sometimes detected
higer than expected (e.g. 20.027 MHz compared to 16.714 MHz).
It seems sometimes the mdelay() function is not as precise as it
Mikael Pettersson wrote:
> On Wed, 11 Jul 2007 10:45:35 +0800, Albert Lee wrote:
>
>>So, it seems both mdelay(37) and do_gettimeofday() are working properly on
>>PowerMac G3.
>>Maybe the calculated wrong PLL input is due to wrong reading of the counter
>>register?
>>Could you please try the atta
On Wed, 11 Jul 2007 10:45:35 +0800, Albert Lee wrote:
> Mikael Pettersson wrote:
> >
> >
> > 2.6.22 + this prints the following on my G3:
> >
> > pata_pdc2027x :00:0e.0: version 0.9
> > usec_elapsed for mdelay(37) [35431]
> > start time: [1184112028]s [775333]us
> > end time: [1184112028]
Mikael Pettersson wrote:
>
>
> 2.6.22 + this prints the following on my G3:
>
> pata_pdc2027x :00:0e.0: version 0.9
> usec_elapsed for mdelay(37) [35431]
> start time: [1184112028]s [775333]us
> end time: [1184112028]s [810764]us
> pata_pdc2027x :00:0e.0: PLL input clock 1691741 kHz
On Tue, 10 Jul 2007 11:52:59 +0800, Albert Lee wrote:
> >>Recently the PLL input clock of pata_pdc2027x is sometimes detected
> >>higer than expected (e.g. 20.027 MHz compared to 16.714 MHz).
> >>It seems sometimes the mdelay() function is not as precise as it
> >>used to be. Per Alan's advice, HT
Mikael Pettersson wrote:
> (cc:ing linuxppc-dev)
>
> On Tue, 26 Jun 2007 13:43:15 +0800, Albert Lee wrote:
>
>>Recently the PLL input clock of pata_pdc2027x is sometimes detected
>>higer than expected (e.g. 20.027 MHz compared to 16.714 MHz).
>>It seems sometimes the mdelay() function is not as p
(cc:ing linuxppc-dev)
On Tue, 26 Jun 2007 13:43:15 +0800, Albert Lee wrote:
> Recently the PLL input clock of pata_pdc2027x is sometimes detected
> higer than expected (e.g. 20.027 MHz compared to 16.714 MHz).
> It seems sometimes the mdelay() function is not as precise as it
> used to be. Per Ala
Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
Hi,
Could you also fix pdc202xx_new driver?
"buggy" code should be very similar if not identical...
I was going to do that but since I'm only working part-time in the last
few days, this keeps being deferred. Also, I need to find the card...
MBR, Ser
Hi,
Could you also fix pdc202xx_new driver?
"buggy" code should be very similar if not identical...
On Tuesday 26 June 2007, Albert Lee wrote:
> Recently the PLL input clock of pata_pdc2027x is sometimes detected
> higer than expected (e.g. 20.027 MHz compared to 16.714 MHz).
> It seems sometim
Albert Lee wrote:
Recently the PLL input clock of pata_pdc2027x is sometimes detected
higer than expected (e.g. 20.027 MHz compared to 16.714 MHz).
It seems sometimes the mdelay() function is not as precise as it
used to be. Per Alan's advice, HT or power management might affect
the precision of
Recently the PLL input clock of pata_pdc2027x is sometimes detected
higer than expected (e.g. 20.027 MHz compared to 16.714 MHz).
It seems sometimes the mdelay() function is not as precise as it
used to be. Per Alan's advice, HT or power management might affect
the precision of mdelay().
This patc
15 matches
Mail list logo