Re: [PATCH] IDE: don't offer IDE_GENERIC on ia64

Jeff Garzik
2005-08-11T23:49:12Z

Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> You deduce this by the absence of SecO and PriO? I wonder if lspci
> should be enhanced to notice this, too. I assume that the IRQ 169
> doesn't correspond to anything in /proc/interrupts.

Correct.

> So the scenario in question (correct me if I'm wrong) is that we
> have a PCI IDE device that is handed off in compatibility mode (and
> may only work in that mode). In that case, the PCI *device* still
> exists, so shouldn't the IDE PCI code claim that device, notice that
> it's in compatibility mode, and use the legacy ports and IRQs if
> necessary?
>
> It seems like that all should work even if we don't have IDE_GENERIC.

Yes, you're right. Thinking more, the PCI IDE code should pick that up,
not the IDE_GENERIC code.

Jeff