From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from mail-lf0-x22f.google.com ([2a00:1450:4010:c07::22f]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.80.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1Zs6XL-00061o-Bi for barebox@lists.infradead.org; Fri, 30 Oct 2015 10:03:56 +0000 Received: by lffz202 with SMTP id z202so30702587lff.3 for ; Fri, 30 Oct 2015 03:03:32 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2015 13:06:09 +0300 From: Peter Mamonov Message-ID: <20151030130609.0d054aaf@berta> In-Reply-To: <201510300953.50440.jbe@pengutronix.de> References: <20151029160409.2ad22e14@berta> <20151030073104.GZ25308@pengutronix.de> <201510300953.50440.jbe@pengutronix.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "barebox" Errors-To: barebox-bounces+u.kleine-koenig=pengutronix.de@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: [BUG] ata: disk_ata_drive: SSD drive doesn't pass check for ata id validity To: Juergen Borleis Cc: barebox@lists.infradead.org On Fri, 30 Oct 2015 09:53:50 +0100 Juergen Borleis wrote: > On Friday 30 October 2015 08:31:04 Sascha Hauer wrote: > > On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 04:04:09PM +0300, Peter Mamonov wrote: > > > Hi! > > > > > > Barebox refuses to deal with OCZ-VERTEX4 ssd sata drive, because: > > > ata1: ata id invalid > > > > > > This error is triggered by the following piece of code : > > > > > > static int ata_id_is_valid(const uint16_t *id) > > > { > > > if ((id[ATA_ID_FIELD_VALID] & 1) == 0) { > > > pr_debug("Drive's ID seems invalid\n"); > > > return -EINVAL; > > > } > > > > > > return 0; > > > } > > > > > > The "id" is a sector-sized block of bytes, received after > > > issuing ATA_CMD_ID_ATA command. > > > > > > If I remove this check, the drive works fine. > > > > > > Can someone with better knowledge of ATA standard comment on this > > > issue? > > > > Juergen, do you have an idea what this check is for? Neither U-Boot > > nor the Kernel seem to ever check for bit 0 in this field. > > Seems this bit was meaningful in earlier days: it marked the ID > member in the structure returned by the disk as valid (=1) or invalid > (=0). In the meantime it seems obsolete. The last occurrence I found > is in the Linux kernel in file "drivers/block/mg_disk.c". All other > code which checks this register content just check bits 1 and 2. I > vote for removing this piece of code. Thanks for clarification. > > jbe > _______________________________________________ barebox mailing list barebox@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox