linux/drivers/ata/libata.h

255 lines
11 KiB

libata: implement slave_link Explanation taken from the comment of ata_slave_link_init(). In libata, a port contains links and a link contains devices. There is single host link but if a PMP is attached to it, there can be multiple fan-out links. On SATA, there's usually a single device connected to a link but PATA and SATA controllers emulating TF based interface can have two - master and slave. However, there are a few controllers which don't fit into this abstraction too well - SATA controllers which emulate TF interface with both master and slave devices but also have separate SCR register sets for each device. These controllers need separate links for physical link handling (e.g. onlineness, link speed) but should be treated like a traditional M/S controller for everything else (e.g. command issue, softreset). slave_link is libata's way of handling this class of controllers without impacting core layer too much. For anything other than physical link handling, the default host link is used for both master and slave. For physical link handling, separate @ap->slave_link is used. All dirty details are implemented inside libata core layer. From LLD's POV, the only difference is that prereset, hardreset and postreset are called once more for the slave link, so the reset sequence looks like the following. prereset(M) -> prereset(S) -> hardreset(M) -> hardreset(S) -> softreset(M) -> postreset(M) -> postreset(S) Note that softreset is called only for the master. Softreset resets both M/S by definition, so SRST on master should handle both (the standard method will work just fine). As slave_link excludes PMP support and only code paths which deal with the attributes of physical link are affected, all the changes are localized to libata.h, libata-core.c and libata-eh.c. * ata_is_host_link() updated so that slave_link is considered as host link too. * iterator extended to iterate over the slave_link when using the underbarred version. * force param handling updated such that devno 16 is mapped to the slave link/device. * ata_link_on/offline() updated to return the combined result from master and slave link. ata_phys_link_on/offline() are the direct versions. * EH autopsy and report are performed separately for master slave links. Reset is udpated to implement the above described reset sequence. Except for reset update, most changes are minor, many of them just modifying dev->link to ata_dev_phys_link(dev) or using phys online test instead. After this update, LLDs can take full advantage of per-dev SCR registers by simply turning on slave link. Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@redhat.com>
2008-07-31 17:02:43 +09:00
libata: implement slave_link Explanation taken from the comment of ata_slave_link_init(). In libata, a port contains links and a link contains devices. There is single host link but if a PMP is attached to it, there can be multiple fan-out links. On SATA, there's usually a single device connected to a link but PATA and SATA controllers emulating TF based interface can have two - master and slave. However, there are a few controllers which don't fit into this abstraction too well - SATA controllers which emulate TF interface with both master and slave devices but also have separate SCR register sets for each device. These controllers need separate links for physical link handling (e.g. onlineness, link speed) but should be treated like a traditional M/S controller for everything else (e.g. command issue, softreset). slave_link is libata's way of handling this class of controllers without impacting core layer too much. For anything other than physical link handling, the default host link is used for both master and slave. For physical link handling, separate @ap->slave_link is used. All dirty details are implemented inside libata core layer. From LLD's POV, the only difference is that prereset, hardreset and postreset are called once more for the slave link, so the reset sequence looks like the following. prereset(M) -> prereset(S) -> hardreset(M) -> hardreset(S) -> softreset(M) -> postreset(M) -> postreset(S) Note that softreset is called only for the master. Softreset resets both M/S by definition, so SRST on master should handle both (the standard method will work just fine). As slave_link excludes PMP support and only code paths which deal with the attributes of physical link are affected, all the changes are localized to libata.h, libata-core.c and libata-eh.c. * ata_is_host_link() updated so that slave_link is considered as host link too. * iterator extended to iterate over the slave_link when using the underbarred version. * force param handling updated such that devno 16 is mapped to the slave link/device. * ata_link_on/offline() updated to return the combined result from master and slave link. ata_phys_link_on/offline() are the direct versions. * EH autopsy and report are performed separately for master slave links. Reset is udpated to implement the above described reset sequence. Except for reset update, most changes are minor, many of them just modifying dev->link to ata_dev_phys_link(dev) or using phys online test instead. After this update, LLDs can take full advantage of per-dev SCR registers by simply turning on slave link. Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@redhat.com>
2008-07-31 17:02:43 +09:00
2006-11-22 14:55:48 +00:00
2006-11-22 14:55:48 +00:00
libata: implement cross-port EH exclusion In libata, the non-EH code paths should always take and release ap->lock explicitly when accessing hardware or shared data structures. However, once EH is active, it's assumed that the port is owned by EH and EH methods don't explicitly take ap->lock unless race from irq handler or other code paths are expected. However, libata EH didn't guarantee exclusion among EHs for ports of the same host. IOW, multiple EHs may execute in parallel on multiple ports of the same controller. In many cases, especially in SATA, the ports are completely independent of each other and this doesn't cause problems; however, there are cases where different ports share the same resource, which lead to obscure timing related bugs such as the one fixed by commit 213373cf (ata_piix: fix locking around SIDPR access). This patch implements exclusion among EHs of the same host. When EH begins, it acquires per-host EH ownership by calling ata_eh_acquire(). When EH finishes, the ownership is released by calling ata_eh_release(). EH ownership is also released whenever the EH thread goes to sleep from ata_msleep() or explicitly and reacquired after waking up. This ensures that while EH is actively accessing the hardware, it has exclusive access to it while allowing EHs to interleave and progress in parallel as they hit waiting stages, which dominate the time spent in EH. This achieves cross-port EH exclusion without pervasive and fragile changes while still allowing parallel EH for the most part. This was first reported by yuanding02@gmail.com more than three years ago in the following bugzilla. :-) https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8223 Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org> Cc: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> Reported-by: yuanding02@gmail.com Signed-off-by: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@redhat.com>
2010-09-06 17:57:14 +02:00
libata: check zero power ready status for ZPODD Per the Mount Fuji spec, the ODD is considered zero power ready when: - For slot type ODD, no media inside; - For tray type ODD, no media inside and tray closed. The information can be retrieved by either the returned information of command GET_EVENT_STATUS_NOTIFICATION(the command is used to poll for media event) or sense code. The information provided by the media status byte is not accurate, it is possible that after a new disc is just inserted, the status byte still returns media not present. So this information can not be used as the deciding factor, we use sense code to decide if zpready status is true. When we first sensed the ODD in the zero power ready state, the zp_sampled will be set and timestamp will be recoreded. And after ODD stayed in this state for some pre-defined period, the ODD is considered as power off ready and the zp_ready flag will be set. The zp_ready flag serves as the deciding factor other code will use to see if power off is OK for the ODD. The Mount Fuji spec suggests a delay should be used here, to avoid the case user ejects the ODD and then instantly inserts a new one again, so that we can avoid a power transition. And some ODDs may be slow to place its head to the home position after disc is ejected, so a delay here is generally a good idea. And the delay time can be changed via the module param zpodd_poweroff_delay. The zero power ready status check is performed in the ata port's runtime suspend code path, when port is not frozen yet, as we need to issue some IOs to the ODD. Signed-off-by: Aaron Lu <aaron.lu@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@redhat.com>
2013-01-15 17:21:00 +08:00
libata: check zero power ready status for ZPODD Per the Mount Fuji spec, the ODD is considered zero power ready when: - For slot type ODD, no media inside; - For tray type ODD, no media inside and tray closed. The information can be retrieved by either the returned information of command GET_EVENT_STATUS_NOTIFICATION(the command is used to poll for media event) or sense code. The information provided by the media status byte is not accurate, it is possible that after a new disc is just inserted, the status byte still returns media not present. So this information can not be used as the deciding factor, we use sense code to decide if zpready status is true. When we first sensed the ODD in the zero power ready state, the zp_sampled will be set and timestamp will be recoreded. And after ODD stayed in this state for some pre-defined period, the ODD is considered as power off ready and the zp_ready flag will be set. The zp_ready flag serves as the deciding factor other code will use to see if power off is OK for the ODD. The Mount Fuji spec suggests a delay should be used here, to avoid the case user ejects the ODD and then instantly inserts a new one again, so that we can avoid a power transition. And some ODDs may be slow to place its head to the home position after disc is ejected, so a delay here is generally a good idea. And the delay time can be changed via the module param zpodd_poweroff_delay. The zero power ready status check is performed in the ata port's runtime suspend code path, when port is not frozen yet, as we need to issue some IOs to the ODD. Signed-off-by: Aaron Lu <aaron.lu@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@redhat.com>
2013-01-15 17:21:00 +08:00
libata: check zero power ready status for ZPODD Per the Mount Fuji spec, the ODD is considered zero power ready when: - For slot type ODD, no media inside; - For tray type ODD, no media inside and tray closed. The information can be retrieved by either the returned information of command GET_EVENT_STATUS_NOTIFICATION(the command is used to poll for media event) or sense code. The information provided by the media status byte is not accurate, it is possible that after a new disc is just inserted, the status byte still returns media not present. So this information can not be used as the deciding factor, we use sense code to decide if zpready status is true. When we first sensed the ODD in the zero power ready state, the zp_sampled will be set and timestamp will be recoreded. And after ODD stayed in this state for some pre-defined period, the ODD is considered as power off ready and the zp_ready flag will be set. The zp_ready flag serves as the deciding factor other code will use to see if power off is OK for the ODD. The Mount Fuji spec suggests a delay should be used here, to avoid the case user ejects the ODD and then instantly inserts a new one again, so that we can avoid a power transition. And some ODDs may be slow to place its head to the home position after disc is ejected, so a delay here is generally a good idea. And the delay time can be changed via the module param zpodd_poweroff_delay. The zero power ready status check is performed in the ata port's runtime suspend code path, when port is not frozen yet, as we need to issue some IOs to the ODD. Signed-off-by: Aaron Lu <aaron.lu@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@redhat.com>
2013-01-15 17:21:00 +08:00