From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff Garzik Subject: Random libata comments... Date: Mon, 22 May 2006 19:26:49 -0400 Message-ID: <447248B9.6040304@garzik.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from srv5.dvmed.net ([207.36.208.214]:51106 "EHLO mail.dvmed.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751128AbWEVX0v (ORCPT ); Mon, 22 May 2006 19:26:51 -0400 Sender: linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org To: "linux-ide@vger.kernel.org" Cc: Tejun Heo * I agree with others that using the "ata_drive_probe_reset" can lead to confusion on the uses of the word "drive". Replacing that with "do" or something else would be nice. * As the ata_drive_probe_reset argument list continues to grow, I lean more and more towards moving all those function pointers to struct ata_port_operations. One of the problems with the drivers/ide layer IMO is that the list of all hooks used is not immediately clear upon first read, whereas with libata it is clear -- with the notable exception of ata_drive_probe_reset().