From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Fri, 14 Feb 2003 12:53:31 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Fri, 14 Feb 2003 12:53:31 -0500 Received: from louise.pinerecords.com ([213.168.176.16]:31616 "EHLO louise.pinerecords.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Fri, 14 Feb 2003 12:53:31 -0500 Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2003 19:03:20 +0100 From: Tomas Szepe To: Larry Hileman Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Question about 48 bit IDE on 2.4.18 kernel Message-ID: <20030214180320.GG200@louise.pinerecords.com> References: <057889C7F1E5D61193620002A537E8690B5A2D@NCBDC> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <057889C7F1E5D61193620002A537E8690B5A2D@NCBDC> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > [LHileman@snapappliance.com] > > Moving to 2.4.20/21 is a large effort here. If I need to implement > the larger drives in 2.4.18, I'd like to make sure that this > has not already been done and that I have the latest code. Well, the patches to the IDE layer in patch-2.4.19 & patch-2.4.20 are both relatively numerous and large, but should still be quite straightforward to extract, given you're good with various diff utils. The block layer changes that Alan mentions will be minimal and probably easy to trace. -- Tomas Szepe