From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tejun Heo Subject: Re: [PATCH 2.6.19-rc6][RESEND] ata_piix: IDE mode SATA patch for Intel ICH9 Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2006 10:43:26 +0900 Message-ID: <4563AB3E.9050305@gmail.com> References: <39B20DF628532344BC7A2692CB6AEE07A5A356@orsmsx420.amr.corp.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from ug-out-1314.google.com ([66.249.92.171]:32994 "EHLO ug-out-1314.google.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1161733AbWKVBne (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Nov 2006 20:43:34 -0500 Received: by ug-out-1314.google.com with SMTP id 44so46034uga for ; Tue, 21 Nov 2006 17:43:33 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <39B20DF628532344BC7A2692CB6AEE07A5A356@orsmsx420.amr.corp.intel.com> Sender: linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org To: "Gaston, Jason D" Cc: jgarzik@pobox.com, linux-ide@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Gaston, Jason D wrote: > I was thinking that if a functional difference was found, it would be > easier to tweak. > > There are differences between the ICH8 and ICH9 SATA controller. For > example, the PCS register now has port present bits that used to be > reserved in ICH8. I'm not sure how or if these could be used in > ata_piix. Separating ich9 out from ich8 isn't difficult. Let's do that when there is need. ata_piix always has been using the same entry if there is no code difference and I don't see any reason to depart from that with ich9. Thanks. -- tejun