From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Alan Cox Subject: Re: possibly a dumb question about sb600/700 Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2007 13:16:40 +0000 Message-ID: <20071112131640.3bf0073c@the-village.bc.nu> References: <47381768.2060803@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from outpipe-village-512-1.bc.nu ([81.2.110.250]:48673 "EHLO the-village.bc.nu" rhost-flags-OK-FAIL-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1758314AbXKLNRM (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Nov 2007 08:17:12 -0500 In-Reply-To: <47381768.2060803@gmail.com> Sender: linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org To: Tejun Heo Cc: conke.hu@gmail.com, IDE/ATA development list On Mon, 12 Nov 2007 18:05:44 +0900 Tejun Heo wrote: > Hello, > > I've been looking at PATA support for sb600 and 700 and found something > weird. > > * IDE atiixp.c has a separate entry for sb600 such that it only probes > the first port but sb700 doesn't use the entry. So, does sb600 has one > PATA channel but sb700 has two? > > * libata pata_atiixp.c doesn't have special handling for sb600's > single-channeldness. Is this okay? Should be just fine as I understand it all anyway - the second channel will have no resources assigned if absent which is handled by libata core already. Alan