mirror of
https://mirrors.bfsu.edu.cn/git/linux.git
synced 2024-11-11 04:18:39 +08:00
ata: pata_serverworks: Do not use the term blacklist
Let's not use the term blacklist in the function serverworks_osb4_filter() documentation comment and rather simply refer to what that function looks at: the list of devices with groken UDMA5. While at it, also constify the values of the csb_bad_ata100 array. Of note is that all of this should probably be handled using libata quirk mechanism but it is unclear if these UDMA5 quirks are specific to this controller only. Signed-off-by: Damien Le Moal <dlemoal@kernel.org> Reviewed-by: Niklas Cassel <cassel@kernel.org> Reviewed-by: Igor Pylypiv <ipylypiv@google.com>
This commit is contained in:
parent
58157d607a
commit
858048568c
@ -46,10 +46,11 @@
|
||||
#define SVWKS_CSB5_REVISION_NEW 0x92 /* min PCI_REVISION_ID for UDMA5 (A2.0) */
|
||||
#define SVWKS_CSB6_REVISION 0xa0 /* min PCI_REVISION_ID for UDMA4 (A1.0) */
|
||||
|
||||
/* Seagate Barracuda ATA IV Family drives in UDMA mode 5
|
||||
* can overrun their FIFOs when used with the CSB5 */
|
||||
|
||||
static const char *csb_bad_ata100[] = {
|
||||
/*
|
||||
* Seagate Barracuda ATA IV Family drives in UDMA mode 5
|
||||
* can overrun their FIFOs when used with the CSB5.
|
||||
*/
|
||||
static const char * const csb_bad_ata100[] = {
|
||||
"ST320011A",
|
||||
"ST340016A",
|
||||
"ST360021A",
|
||||
@ -163,10 +164,11 @@ static unsigned int serverworks_osb4_filter(struct ata_device *adev, unsigned in
|
||||
* @adev: ATA device
|
||||
* @mask: Mask of proposed modes
|
||||
*
|
||||
* Check the blacklist and disable UDMA5 if matched
|
||||
* Check the list of devices with broken UDMA5 and
|
||||
* disable UDMA5 if matched.
|
||||
*/
|
||||
|
||||
static unsigned int serverworks_csb_filter(struct ata_device *adev, unsigned int mask)
|
||||
static unsigned int serverworks_csb_filter(struct ata_device *adev,
|
||||
unsigned int mask)
|
||||
{
|
||||
const char *p;
|
||||
char model_num[ATA_ID_PROD_LEN + 1];
|
||||
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue
Block a user