Hello.

Jeff Garzik wrote:

quoted

quoted

quoted

MWDMA0 timings cannot be met with the PIIX based controller
programming interface.

quoted

quoted

This change should be safe as this is how we have been doing
things in IDE it8213 host driver for years.

quoted

quoted

Signed-off-by: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <bzolnier@gmail.com>
---
Verified with the documentation (similar case as with pata_efar).

quoted

Uhhh, no...

quoted

Too many damn drivers.

quoted

Too much damn duplication.

quoted

Too much damn subtle differences here and there.

quoted

The hardware is probably fine for MWMDA0 when it comes to
pata_{efar,it8213},
it just not documented properly in the data sheet.

How so with pata_efar? The active/recovery bitfields are still 2-bit
wide, no?

So....  pata_it8213 is fine for MWDMA0, then?

   No, TTBOMK. I just have no datasheet. However, it's programmed 
overclocked and even in theory the cycle time cannot exceeed 600 ns vs 
480 ns spec'ed.

    Jeff

MBR, Sergei