From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: James Bottomley Subject: Re: ata and netdev (was Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.23) Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2007 14:55:02 -0400 Message-ID: <1184093702.3401.83.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <20070710013152.ef2cd200.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <4693C4F8.40903@garzik.org> <20070710112458.e9dbb55e.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from hancock.steeleye.com ([71.30.118.248]:42351 "EHLO hancock.sc.steeleye.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751475AbXGJSzF (ORCPT ); Tue, 10 Jul 2007 14:55:05 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20070710112458.e9dbb55e.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Sender: linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org To: Andrew Morton Cc: Jeff Garzik , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, IDE/ATA development list , netdev , Tejun Heo , Alan Cox , Deepak Saxena , Dan Faerch , Benjamin LaHaise On Tue, 2007-07-10 at 11:24 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > > > ata-ahci-alpm-store-interrupt-value.patch > > > ata-ahci-alpm-expose-power-management-policy-option-to-users.patch > > > ata-ahci-alpm-enable-link-power-management-for-ata-drivers.patch > > > ata-ahci-alpm-enable-aggressive-link-power-management-for-ahci-controllers.patch > > > > > > These appear to need some work. > > > > seemed mostly OK to me. what comments did I miss? > > Oh, I thought these were the patches which affected scsi and which James > had issues with. I guess I got confused. Well ... my concern was really how to make them more generic ... ahci isn't the only controller that can do phy power management, and it also seemed to me that the most generic entity for power management was the transport rather than the SCSI mid-layer, but that debate is still ongoing. James