From: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <bzolnier@gmail.com>
To: Russell King <rmk+lkml@arm.linux.org.uk>
Cc: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org, Adrian Bunk <bunk@kernel.org>,
linux-pcmcia@lists.infradead.org, Sam Ravnborg <sam@ravnborg.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [2.6 patch] PCMCIA mustn't select HAVE_IDE
Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2008 01:26:10 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200804160126.11116.bzolnier@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20080415223928.GH5676@flint.arm.linux.org.uk>
On Wednesday 16 April 2008, Russell King wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 01:10:02AM +0300, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 11:03:45PM +0100, Russell King wrote:
> > > On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 12:52:23AM +0300, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > >...
> > > So this is a only impacting ARM wrt. PCMCIA, and given that ARM supplies
> > > an asm/ide.h, it's _entirely_ reasonable that if a platform has PCMCIA
> > > then it supports IDE.
> > >
> > > > We could simply always select HAVE_IDE on arm instead of manually
> > > > setting which platforms could possibly get IDE support (e.g. are there
> > > > any boards with PCI slots for which HAVE_IDE is currently not
> > > > selected?).
> > >
> > > You could, if there was a demand for it. As no one has added that,
> > > I conclude that its less common for people to stick an IDE controller
> > > into a PCI backplane.
> >
> > People can always enable code for stuff they don't use.
> >
> > But instead of having 14 ARM platforms plus PCMCIA (which is offered
> > unconditionally on all ARM platforms...) select HAVE_IDE it's simpler
> > to select it once for all ARM platforms.
Please send me a patch doing this, it should be safe for current IDE tree.
> That would seem logical, but Bart objects to that idea.
I don't remember the background but I think it was needed because of badly
perplexed ide_init_hwif_ports() and friends in <asm/ide.h> vs <linux/ide.h>
(almost all this stuff is gone in IDE tree for 2.6.26)...
Ok, I found the patch:
http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/tglx/history.git;a=commitdiff;h=4b3b8ee5db374b76608537e061f2efd90e21179d
[ tglx's history tree since it is from May 2004. ]
> However, consider that we're gradually transitioning over to being
> exclusively libata only.
>
> > > In fact, there are only three classes of ARM platforms which have PCI
> > > selected but not HAVE_IDE - IOP13xx, IXP2000, and Orion. I suspect
> > > the only reason they don't select it because they now use the ATA code
> > > rather than the old IDE code - that's certainly true of Orion.
> >
> > The libata options are offered unconditionally on all platforms...
>
> It wasn't *my* choice to restrict IDE on ARM. See Bart for that
> decision.
It could be that I did the poor job of explaining things back then
but I also didn't like the fact that I needed to restrict the IDE
choice on ARM - the change in question was _necessary_ to start
converting IDE drivers to become real, independent, modular host
drivers and as a preparation for adding proper warm-plug support.
Thanks,
Bart
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-04-15 23:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-04-14 14:16 [2.6 patch] PCMCIA mustn't select HAVE_IDE Adrian Bunk
2008-04-14 17:53 ` Sam Ravnborg
2008-04-15 20:15 ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
2008-04-15 21:23 ` Adrian Bunk
2008-04-15 21:28 ` Russell King
2008-04-15 21:42 ` Russell King
2008-04-15 21:52 ` Adrian Bunk
2008-04-15 22:03 ` Russell King
2008-04-15 22:10 ` Adrian Bunk
2008-04-15 22:39 ` Russell King
2008-04-15 23:26 ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz [this message]
2008-04-17 9:37 ` [2.6 patch] ARM: always " Adrian Bunk
2008-04-17 9:59 ` Russell King
2008-04-17 10:48 ` Adrian Bunk
2008-04-17 11:00 ` Russell King
2008-04-17 13:25 ` Adrian Bunk
2008-04-19 11:33 ` Russell King
2008-04-27 18:32 ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
2008-04-27 20:29 ` Sam Ravnborg
2008-04-27 21:06 ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
2008-04-17 12:38 ` Matthew Wilcox
2008-04-27 17:53 ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
2008-04-15 21:26 ` [2.6 patch] PCMCIA mustn't " Russell King
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=200804160126.11116.bzolnier@gmail.com \
--to=bzolnier@gmail.com \
--cc=bunk@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-ide@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pcmcia@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=rmk+lkml@arm.linux.org.uk \
--cc=sam@ravnborg.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).