From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1OBON8-0003Ku-Ey for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 10 May 2010 04:29:54 -0400 Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=60070 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OBOL7-0002ky-FP for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 10 May 2010 04:29:52 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OBO6m-0002uJ-OS for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 10 May 2010 04:16:37 -0400 Received: from va3ehsobe004.messaging.microsoft.com ([216.32.180.14]:26475 helo=VA3EHSOBE004.bigfish.com) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OBO6k-0002tA-A3 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 10 May 2010 04:13:00 -0400 From: Christoph Egger Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: AHCI support integration Date: Mon, 10 May 2010 10:12:32 +0200 References: <1945C1D2D39F43239CFD537CA66DA5F8@FSCPC> <4BE708D5.5080405@suse.de> In-Reply-To: <4BE708D5.5080405@suse.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-ID: <201005101012.33302.Christoph.Egger@amd.com> List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org Cc: =?utf-8?q?=E4=B9=94=E5=B4=87?= , Joerg Roedel , Alexander Graf , "teheo@suse.de" , Sebastian Herbszt , Elek Roland On Sunday 09 May 2010 21:11:17 Alexander Graf wrote: > Sebastian Herbszt wrote: > > The ICH6 AHCI implementation submitted by Chong is an all-in-one > > attempt (ahci.c). > > It includes all needed parts of the ICH6, AHCI, SATA and ATA > > specification. > > The code in hw/ide/* on the other hand is split (or could be split) > > into smaller parts like > > port based and bus master access, IDE and ATA core. > > I think it might be reasonable to split ahci.c into ICH6, AHCI and > > SATA parts and strip the > > limited ATA support and reuse it from the ide core. > > This would give us something like the following: > > > > hw/ide/piix.c (PIIX3 and PIIX4) > > hw/ide/pci.c and core.c (IDE, BM) > > hw/ata-core.c (ATA) > > hw/sata/ich6.c (ICH6) > > hw/sata-core.c (SATA) > > hw/ahci-core.c (AHCI) > > > > Should this be a goal or am i over-engineering here? > > [CC'ing Tejun - he volunteered to help out on this topic as well] > > I think there's no need to split sata and ahci. > Apart from that, I think we should take things incrementally. For now > there's no need to split IDE further until we hit a technical limit. I > have yet to see a patch trying to reuse the IDE command processing, so > depending on how the respective person implements that, I'm open to > suggenstions. > > So as far as I'm concerned, I'd prefer to model things after they're > developed. That way we know the pitfalls. You missed Sebastians point. His question is related to software design. Christoph -- ---to satisfy European Law for business letters: Advanced Micro Devices GmbH Einsteinring 24, 85609 Dornach b. Muenchen Geschaeftsfuehrer: Andrew Bowd, Thomas M. McCoy, Giuliano Meroni Sitz: Dornach, Gemeinde Aschheim, Landkreis Muenchen Registergericht Muenchen, HRB Nr. 43632