From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/68] ide2libata Date: Sat, 30 Jan 2010 16:24:10 +0100 Message-ID: <201001301624.10174.bzolnier@gmail.com> References: <20100129160308.21495.14120.sendpatchset@localhost> <4B6355DF.9050001@garzik.org> <20100129232540.41f6c4f6@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mail-fx0-f220.google.com ([209.85.220.220]:57254 "EHLO mail-fx0-f220.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754112Ab0A3PYx (ORCPT ); Sat, 30 Jan 2010 10:24:53 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20100129232540.41f6c4f6@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> Sender: linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org To: Alan Cox Cc: Jeff Garzik , linux-ide@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Saturday 30 January 2010 12:25:40 am Alan Cox wrote: > So I think its an extremely useful exercise to figure out what subtle > differences there are between the drivers. It's not then a trivial > assumption that they can just be pasted over. The include stuff though is Fully agreed, that is why a fair deal of review work went into making sure that porting of a each driver to ide2libata doesn't cause functionality changes. > too ugly to merge even if its an excellent research project to identify > the differences and quirks. Well, looks acceptable to me when the alternative is a duplicated code (though I don't insists on getting it merged anyway).. -- Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz