From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Dirk GOUDERS Subject: Re: [discuss] "ide=reverse" do we still need this? Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2008 08:54:55 +0100 Message-ID: <1237.1202889295@sora.hank.home> References: <20080213001506.GA13933@kroah.com> Return-path: Received: from alice.et.bocholt.fh-gelsenkirchen.de ([193.175.197.63]:54799 "EHLO alice.et.bocholt.fh-gelsenkirchen.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754044AbYBMIJx (ORCPT ); Wed, 13 Feb 2008 03:09:53 -0500 In-reply-to: <20080213001506.GA13933@kroah.com> Sender: linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org To: Greg KH Cc: bzolnier@gmail.com, muli@il.ibm.com, discuss@x86-64.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-ide@vger.kernel.org, jdmason@kudzu.us, linux-pci@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz Hi, > I'm reworking the pci device list logic (we currently keep all PCI > devices in 2 lists, which isn't the nicest, we should be able to get > away with only 1 list.) > > The only bother I've found so far is the pci_get_device_reverse() > function, it's used in 2 places, IDE and the calgary driver. > > I'm curious if we really still support the ide=reverse option? It's a > config option that I don't think the distros still enable (SuSE does > not). Is this still needed these days? > > In digging, we changed this option in 2.2.x from being called > "pci=reverse" and no one else seems to miss it. > > Any thoughts? I remember vaguely that some years ago, we set up a box with four IDE disks as a RAID set. For that purpose, we added a PCI ATA100 controller so that each disk could act as a primary IDE device and we were only able to boot the system with the option ide=reverse. That box has been replaced by some other so I cannot verify it but as far as I remember it was a problem with disk numbering between BIOS, bootloader and/or kernel. Also, at that time we used lilo and I am not sure if grub would have done better. Dirk