| Message ID | 20221229170005.49118-1-niklas.cassel@wdc.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| Headers | show |
| Series | misc libata improvements | expand |
On 12/30/22 01:59, Niklas Cassel wrote: > Hello there, > > This series contains misc libata improvements. > > These improvements were identified while developing support for Command > Duration Limits (CDL). All patches in this series (i.e. V1 of these > patches) were orignally sent out as part of the CDL series, found here: > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-scsi/510732e0-7962-cf54-c22c-f1d7066895f5@opensource.wdc.com/T/ > > However, as these improvements are completely unrelated to CDL, they can > be merged independently, and should not need to wait for other patches. Applied the series to for-6.3. Patch 1 had a small conflict that I fixed up. Thanks ! > > > Kind regards, > Niklas > > > Changes since V1: > -Added missing chain sign-off (in addition to author sign-off). > -Picked up tags from John. > -Rephrased commit message for patch 1/7 as suggested by John. > -Rephrased commit subject for patch 3/7 to more clearly hightlight > that this is simply an improvement, and not strictly a bug fix. > > Damien Le Moal (2): > ata: libata: simplify qc_fill_rtf port operation interface > ata: libata-scsi: improve ata_scsiop_maint_in() > > Niklas Cassel (5): > ata: scsi: rename flag ATA_QCFLAG_FAILED to ATA_QCFLAG_EH > ata: libata: read the shared status for successful NCQ commands once > ata: libata: respect successfully completed commands during errors > ata: libata: move NCQ related ATA_DFLAGs > ata: libata-scsi: do not overwrite SCSI ML and status bytes > > drivers/ata/acard-ahci.c | 8 +- > drivers/ata/libahci.c | 171 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------- > drivers/ata/libata-core.c | 12 +-- > drivers/ata/libata-eh.c | 22 ++--- > drivers/ata/libata-sata.c | 7 +- > drivers/ata/libata-scsi.c | 11 ++- > drivers/ata/libata-sff.c | 10 +- > drivers/ata/libata-trace.c | 2 +- > drivers/ata/sata_fsl.c | 5 +- > drivers/ata/sata_inic162x.c | 14 ++- > drivers/ata/sata_promise.c | 2 +- > drivers/ata/sata_sil24.c | 7 +- > drivers/ata/sata_sx4.c | 2 +- > drivers/scsi/ipr.c | 11 +-- > drivers/scsi/libsas/sas_ata.c | 11 +-- > include/linux/libata.h | 25 ++--- > 16 files changed, 201 insertions(+), 119 deletions(-) >
On Wed, Jan 04, 2023 at 01:43:54PM +0900, Damien Le Moal wrote: > On 12/30/22 01:59, Niklas Cassel wrote: > > Hello there, > > > > This series contains misc libata improvements. > > > > These improvements were identified while developing support for Command > > Duration Limits (CDL). All patches in this series (i.e. V1 of these > > patches) were orignally sent out as part of the CDL series, found here: > > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-scsi/510732e0-7962-cf54-c22c-f1d7066895f5@opensource.wdc.com/T/ > > > > However, as these improvements are completely unrelated to CDL, they can > > be merged independently, and should not need to wait for other patches. > > Applied the series to for-6.3. Patch 1 had a small conflict that I fixed > up. Thanks ! I had a look at the SHA1 for this patch in your tree, and it looks good. However, patches 2/7, 3/7, 4/7, 7/7 seem to miss your chain sign-off. Kind regards, Niklas
On Wed, Jan 04, 2023 at 11:12:29AM +0100, Niklas Cassel wrote: > On Wed, Jan 04, 2023 at 01:43:54PM +0900, Damien Le Moal wrote: > > On 12/30/22 01:59, Niklas Cassel wrote: > > > Hello there, > > > > > > This series contains misc libata improvements. > > > > > > These improvements were identified while developing support for Command > > > Duration Limits (CDL). All patches in this series (i.e. V1 of these > > > patches) were orignally sent out as part of the CDL series, found here: > > > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-scsi/510732e0-7962-cf54-c22c-f1d7066895f5@opensource.wdc.com/T/ > > > > > > However, as these improvements are completely unrelated to CDL, they can > > > be merged independently, and should not need to wait for other patches. > > > > Applied the series to for-6.3. Patch 1 had a small conflict that I fixed > > up. Thanks ! > > I had a look at the SHA1 for this patch in your tree, and it looks good. > > However, patches 2/7, 3/7, 4/7, 7/7 seem to miss your chain sign-off. Is this perhaps because checkpatch complains if the same sign-off exists twice on the same patch? Not sure if this should be ignored or not... To me, it seems more important to keep a record of the chain, than to keep checkpatch happy, but I could be wrong here.. Kind regards, Niklas
On 1/4/23 19:16, Niklas Cassel wrote: > On Wed, Jan 04, 2023 at 11:12:29AM +0100, Niklas Cassel wrote: >> On Wed, Jan 04, 2023 at 01:43:54PM +0900, Damien Le Moal wrote: >>> On 12/30/22 01:59, Niklas Cassel wrote: >>>> Hello there, >>>> >>>> This series contains misc libata improvements. >>>> >>>> These improvements were identified while developing support for Command >>>> Duration Limits (CDL). All patches in this series (i.e. V1 of these >>>> patches) were orignally sent out as part of the CDL series, found here: >>>> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-scsi/510732e0-7962-cf54-c22c-f1d7066895f5@opensource.wdc.com/T/ >>>> >>>> However, as these improvements are completely unrelated to CDL, they can >>>> be merged independently, and should not need to wait for other patches. >>> >>> Applied the series to for-6.3. Patch 1 had a small conflict that I fixed >>> up. Thanks ! >> >> I had a look at the SHA1 for this patch in your tree, and it looks good. >> >> However, patches 2/7, 3/7, 4/7, 7/7 seem to miss your chain sign-off. > > Is this perhaps because checkpatch complains if the same sign-off exists > twice on the same patch? > > Not sure if this should be ignored or not... > To me, it seems more important to keep a record of the chain, > than to keep checkpatch happy, but I could be wrong here.. I do not sign again patches that already have my SoB. linux-next build bot will complain if I forget signing patches I apply, but it does not seem that the order matters... Not entirely certain about the correct practice with that though. > > > Kind regards, > Niklas