[PATCHSET] libata: PATA driver for Celleb

[PATCHSET] libata: PATA driver for Celleb

[Akira Iguchi]

Dear everyone.

Thank you for many useful comments.
This is the latest patchset for the PATA controller of Celleb. 

This patchset consists of
[1] add another IRQ calls (core and headers)
[2] add another IRQ calls (libata drivers)
[3] PATA driver for Celleb

And patch[3] depends on patch[1,2].

This patchset is based on the Tejun's "devres" git tree, which is
available at the followin URL.

http://htj.dyndns.org/git/?p=libata-tj.git;a=commit;h=efc6607aefe728b2721f6a0126bc527bc23eb46f


Best regards,
Akira Iguchi

[PATCHSET] libata: PATA driver for Celleb

[Akira Iguchi]

Dear everyone.

Thank you for many useful comments.
This is the latest patchset for the PATA controller of Celleb. 

This patchset consists of
[1] add another IRQ calls (core and headers)
[2] add another IRQ calls (libata drivers)
[3] PATA driver for Celleb

And patch[3] depends on patch[1,2].

This patchset is based on the Tejun's "devres" git tree, which is
available at the followin URL.

http://htj.dyndns.org/git/?p=libata-tj.git;a=commit;h=efc6607aefe728b2721f6a0126bc527bc23eb46f


Best regards,
Akira Iguchi

Re: [PATCHSET] libata: PATA driver for Celleb

[Jeff Garzik]

Akira Iguchi wrote:
> Dear everyone.
> 
> Thank you for many useful comments.
> This is the latest patchset for the PATA controller of Celleb. 
> 
> This patchset consists of
> [1] add another IRQ calls (core and headers)
> [2] add another IRQ calls (libata drivers)
> [3] PATA driver for Celleb
> 
> And patch[3] depends on patch[1,2].
> 
> This patchset is based on the Tejun's "devres" git tree, which is
> available at the followin URL.

Everything looks great, thanks!

I'll apply this patchset immediately after applying Tejun's devres patchset.

	Jeff

Re: [PATCHSET] libata: PATA driver for Celleb

[Akira Iguchi]

Hi, Jeff-san.

>Jeff Garzik wrote:
>> This patchset consists of
>> [1] add another IRQ calls (core and headers)
>> [2] add another IRQ calls (libata drivers)
>> [3] PATA driver for Celleb
>> 
>> And patch[3] depends on patch[1,2].
>> 
>> This patchset is based on the Tejun's "devres" git tree, which is
>> available at the followin URL.
>
>Everything looks great, thanks!
>
>I'll apply this patchset immediately after applying Tejun's devres patchset.
>

Thank you for applying some parts of my patches (patch[1,2]).
But it is my goal that this Celleb patch (patch[3]) is merged into your git tree.
What's the status of this patch?

2.6.20 has been released and (I think) it is the time of merge-window
for 2.6.21. I want this patch to be merged at this time.
Please tell me if there are anything I should do.


Best regards,
Akira Iguchi

Re: [PATCHSET] libata: PATA driver for Celleb

[Akira Iguchi]

Hi, Jeff-san.

>Jeff Garzik wrote:
>> This patchset consists of
>> [1] add another IRQ calls (core and headers)
>> [2] add another IRQ calls (libata drivers)
>> [3] PATA driver for Celleb
>> 
>> And patch[3] depends on patch[1,2].
>> 
>> This patchset is based on the Tejun's "devres" git tree, which is
>> available at the followin URL.
>
>Everything looks great, thanks!
>
>I'll apply this patchset immediately after applying Tejun's devres patchset.
>

Thank you for applying some parts of my patches (patch[1,2]).
But it is my goal that this Celleb patch (patch[3]) is merged into your git tree.
What's the status of this patch?

2.6.20 has been released and (I think) it is the time of merge-window
for 2.6.21. I want this patch to be merged at this time.
Please tell me if there are anything I should do.


Best regards,
Akira Iguchi

Re: [PATCHSET] libata: PATA driver for Celleb

[Benjamin Herrenschmidt]

> 2.6.20 has been released and (I think) it is the time of merge-window
> for 2.6.21. I want this patch to be merged at this time.
> Please tell me if there are anything I should do.

FYI, Jeff, we have merged the rest of the celleb platform support in the
2.6.21 merge window, so it would be annoying if that didn't make it
(that and some spidernet fixes).

Ben.

Re: [PATCHSET] libata: PATA driver for Celleb

[Jeff Garzik]

Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
>> 2.6.20 has been released and (I think) it is the time of merge-window
>> for 2.6.21. I want this patch to be merged at this time.
>> Please tell me if there are anything I should do.
> 
> FYI, Jeff, we have merged the rest of the celleb platform support in the
> 2.6.21 merge window, so it would be annoying if that didn't make it

agreed, that's on the list to get pushed


> (that and some spidernet fixes).

I'm totally confused about who the heck is the spidernet maintainer.  My 
inbox is pelted by spidernet driver updates from multiple people, and 
often the spidernet patches (regardless of author) receive comments that 
give me pause.  The MAINTAINERS file says

> SPIDERNET NETWORK DRIVER for CELL
> P:      Jim Lewis
> M:      jim@jklewis.com
> L:      netdev@vger.kernel.org
> S:      Supported

but I do not see patch roll-ups or much activity from him at all.  In 
practice, it seems like Linas does patchsets for spidernet, but there is 
also Jakob Osterkemp(sp?) and Ishizaki and....

My overall impression of spidernet development is that EVERYBODY is 
submitting patches at once, and expecting me to sort out the mess.  No 
thanks.

Speaking with one voice would be much appreciated.  And said speaker 
should patch the MAINTAINERS file to reflect reality.

	Jeff

spidernet (was Re: [PATCHSET] libata: PATA driver for Celleb)

[Jeff Garzik]

> My overall impression of spidernet development is that EVERYBODY is submitting patches at once, and expecting me to sort out the mess.  No thanks.
> 
> Speaking with one voice would be much appreciated.  And said speaker should patch the MAINTAINERS file to reflect reality. 


To be specific, I have dropped -all- spidernet patches I had pending in 
email, and at the present time there are no unsent spidernet commits in 
netdev-2.6.git.

I'll await the resend of any pending patches from the driver maintainer, 
once you guys sort out who that is.

	Jeff

Re: [PATCHSET] libata: PATA driver for Celleb

[Benjamin Herrenschmidt]

> I'm totally confused about who the heck is the spidernet maintainer.

Me too :-)

> My 
> inbox is pelted by spidernet driver updates from multiple people, and 
> often the spidernet patches (regardless of author) receive comments that 
> give me pause.  The MAINTAINERS file says
> 
> > SPIDERNET NETWORK DRIVER for CELL
> > P:      Jim Lewis
> > M:      jim@jklewis.com
> > L:      netdev@vger.kernel.org
> > S:      Supported
> 
> but I do not see patch roll-ups or much activity from him at all.  In 
> practice, it seems like Linas does patchsets for spidernet, but there is 
> also Jakob Osterkemp(sp?) and Ishizaki and....

I think Jens Osterkampf should be the final ACK/NAK'er as he has all the
hardware to test except the Toshiba gear :-) In fact, Jens, if you are
ok with that, I'd like to have you be the maintainer of that driver,
unless you think it's better for Linas to do it.

> My overall impression of spidernet development is that EVERYBODY is 
> submitting patches at once, and expecting me to sort out the mess.  No 
> thanks.

It's been a bit of a mess. I suggest we get our gear together (Linas,
Jens, Kou) and provide you a single patch set from a single source in
the upcoming couple of days coming from the designated maintainer.

Jens ? Linas ? Is that ok with you guys ? Who gets to be that
maintainer ?

_ALSO_ since spidernet uses (and modifies) sungem_phy.c, we need either
DaveM or my ack there (DaveM is sungem maintainer but I wrote sungem_phy
and most of it is only used on powermacs).

Thus let's move that back to the cbe-oss-dev mailing list, our
designated maintainer will post there a candidate patch set, I will
verify the sungem_phy change is ok with powermac (I myself haven't
followed enough to figure out what patch is the latest there), we'll all
test on our respective hardware, and then that maintainer will send you
one patch set to apply.

That shouldn't take more than a few days. If we miss -rc1, well, then it
will be in -rc2, as most of the patches have been around for long enough
etc... it's really mostly a matter of getting our gear together.

> Speaking with one voice would be much appreciated.  And said speaker 
> should patch the MAINTAINERS file to reflect reality.

Agreed,

Ben.

Re: spidernet (was Re: [PATCHSET] libata: PATA driver for Celleb)

[Benjamin Herrenschmidt]

On Thu, 2007-02-15 at 00:12 -0500, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> > My overall impression of spidernet development is that EVERYBODY is submitting patches at once, and expecting me to sort out the mess.  No thanks.
> > 
> > Speaking with one voice would be much appreciated.  And said speaker should patch the MAINTAINERS file to reflect reality. 
> 
> 
> To be specific, I have dropped -all- spidernet patches I had pending in 
> email, and at the present time there are no unsent spidernet commits in 
> netdev-2.6.git.
> 
> I'll await the resend of any pending patches from the driver maintainer, 
> once you guys sort out who that is.

That's the right approach. Agreed.

Ben.

Re: [PATCHSET] libata: PATA driver for Celleb

[Jens Osterkamp]

On Thursday 15 February 2007, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> 
> > I'm totally confused about who the heck is the spidernet maintainer.
> 
> Me too :-)
> 
> > My 
> > inbox is pelted by spidernet driver updates from multiple people, and 
> > often the spidernet patches (regardless of author) receive comments that 
> > give me pause.  The MAINTAINERS file says
> > 
> > > SPIDERNET NETWORK DRIVER for CELL
> > > P:      Jim Lewis
> > > M:      jim@jklewis.com
> > > L:      netdev@vger.kernel.org
> > > S:      Supported
> > 
> > but I do not see patch roll-ups or much activity from him at all.  In 
> > practice, it seems like Linas does patchsets for spidernet, but there is 
> > also Jakob Osterkemp(sp?) and Ishizaki and....
> 
> I think Jens Osterkampf should be the final ACK/NAK'er as he has all the
> hardware to test except the Toshiba gear :-) In fact, Jens, if you are
> ok with that, I'd like to have you be the maintainer of that driver,
> unless you think it's better for Linas to do it.
> 
> > My overall impression of spidernet development is that EVERYBODY is 
> > submitting patches at once, and expecting me to sort out the mess.  No 
> > thanks.
> 
> It's been a bit of a mess. I suggest we get our gear together (Linas,
> Jens, Kou) and provide you a single patch set from a single source in
> the upcoming couple of days coming from the designated maintainer.
> 
> Jens ? Linas ? Is that ok with you guys ? Who gets to be that
> maintainer ?
> 
> _ALSO_ since spidernet uses (and modifies) sungem_phy.c, we need either
> DaveM or my ack there (DaveM is sungem maintainer but I wrote sungem_phy
> and most of it is only used on powermacs).
> 
> Thus let's move that back to the cbe-oss-dev mailing list, our
> designated maintainer will post there a candidate patch set, I will
> verify the sungem_phy change is ok with powermac (I myself haven't
> followed enough to figure out what patch is the latest there), we'll all
> test on our respective hardware, and then that maintainer will send you
> one patch set to apply.
> 
> That shouldn't take more than a few days. If we miss -rc1, well, then it
> will be in -rc2, as most of the patches have been around for long enough
> etc... it's really mostly a matter of getting our gear together.
> 
> > Speaking with one voice would be much appreciated.  And said speaker 
> > should patch the MAINTAINERS file to reflect reality.

Sounds reasonable. I fully agree.

Linas has done a pretty good job on improving the driver in the last half
year or so and he also has access to all the necessary hardware so I think
he would be the right person for the job.

Jens

Re: [PATCHSET] libata: PATA driver for Celleb

[Jim Lewis]

 We have had some discussions previously about Linas Vepstas taking over
the maintainership of Spidernet from me. I will look into this and see
if we can make it happen. 

Jim Lewis


On Thu, 2007-02-15 at 11:41 +0100, Jens Osterkamp wrote:
> On Thursday 15 February 2007, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> > 
> > > I'm totally confused about who the heck is the spidernet maintainer.
> > 
> > Me too :-)
> > 
> > > My 
> > > inbox is pelted by spidernet driver updates from multiple people, and 
> > > often the spidernet patches (regardless of author) receive comments that 
> > > give me pause.  The MAINTAINERS file says
> > > 
> > > > SPIDERNET NETWORK DRIVER for CELL
> > > > P:      Jim Lewis
> > > > M:      jim@jklewis.com
> > > > L:      netdev@vger.kernel.org
> > > > S:      Supported
> > > 
> > > but I do not see patch roll-ups or much activity from him at all.  In 
> > > practice, it seems like Linas does patchsets for spidernet, but there is 
> > > also Jakob Osterkemp(sp?) and Ishizaki and....
> > 
> > I think Jens Osterkampf should be the final ACK/NAK'er as he has all the
> > hardware to test except the Toshiba gear :-) In fact, Jens, if you are
> > ok with that, I'd like to have you be the maintainer of that driver,
> > unless you think it's better for Linas to do it.
> > 
> > > My overall impression of spidernet development is that EVERYBODY is 
> > > submitting patches at once, and expecting me to sort out the mess.  No 
> > > thanks.
> > 
> > It's been a bit of a mess. I suggest we get our gear together (Linas,
> > Jens, Kou) and provide you a single patch set from a single source in
> > the upcoming couple of days coming from the designated maintainer.
> > 
> > Jens ? Linas ? Is that ok with you guys ? Who gets to be that
> > maintainer ?
> > 
> > _ALSO_ since spidernet uses (and modifies) sungem_phy.c, we need either
> > DaveM or my ack there (DaveM is sungem maintainer but I wrote sungem_phy
> > and most of it is only used on powermacs).
> > 
> > Thus let's move that back to the cbe-oss-dev mailing list, our
> > designated maintainer will post there a candidate patch set, I will
> > verify the sungem_phy change is ok with powermac (I myself haven't
> > followed enough to figure out what patch is the latest there), we'll all
> > test on our respective hardware, and then that maintainer will send you
> > one patch set to apply.
> > 
> > That shouldn't take more than a few days. If we miss -rc1, well, then it
> > will be in -rc2, as most of the patches have been around for long enough
> > etc... it's really mostly a matter of getting our gear together.
> > 
> > > Speaking with one voice would be much appreciated.  And said speaker 
> > > should patch the MAINTAINERS file to reflect reality.
> 
> Sounds reasonable. I fully agree.
> 
> Linas has done a pretty good job on improving the driver in the last half
> year or so and he also has access to all the necessary hardware so I think
> he would be the right person for the job.
> 
> Jens

Re: [PATCHSET] libata: PATA driver for Celleb

[Linas Vepstas]

On Thu, Feb 15, 2007 at 11:41:49AM +0100, Jens Osterkamp wrote:
> On Thursday 15 February 2007, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> > > I'm totally confused about who the heck is the spidernet maintainer.
> > 
> > Me too :-)
> > 
> > It's been a bit of a mess. I suggest we get our gear together (Linas,
> > Jens, Kou) and provide you a single patch set from a single source in
> > the upcoming couple of days coming from the designated maintainer.

OK.

However, I think the blast of paches is a statistical anomoly,
I'm expecting future activity on spidernet to drop to just about zero.

> > Jens ? Linas ? Is that ok with you guys ? Who gets to be that
> > maintainer ?
>
> Linas has done a pretty good job on improving the driver in the last half
> year or so and he also has access to all the necessary hardware so I think
> he would be the right person for the job.

It seems I've been nominated twice. Since I'm expecting future activity
to drop to zero, how hard can this be? :-)

I can send a tested patch series (merging all three sources)
immediately, assuming you like the tree these would be based on. 
Any special instructions or proceedures to follow, any secret
initiation rites, hazing, or change of citizenship required?

--linas

Re: [PATCHSET] libata: PATA driver for Celleb

[Arnd Bergmann]

On Thursday 15 February 2007 18:14, Linas Vepstas wrote:
> > Linas has done a pretty good job on improving the driver in the last half
> > year or so and he also has access to all the necessary hardware so I think
> > he would be the right person for the job.
> 
> It seems I've been nominated twice. Since I'm expecting future activity
> to drop to zero, how hard can this be? :-)

I fear that the hardest part is yet to come, when we integrate the
driver for the the PS3 (currently called gelic_net) into spidernet.
The trouble is that the hardware is sufficiently similar to share
all the high-level mechanisms like the DMA data structures and
descriptor chains, but the low-level mechanisms are hidden in the
hypervisor on the PS3. Someone will have to invest a significant
amount of time coordinating this so we don't break celleb and qs20
in the process.

I also think that you'd do a good job doing this, but it may be
more that what you are willing to do without official funding of the
time you spend on it. Of course the actual amount of work will
depend a lot on the quality of the spidernet patches coming from
Sony to the spidernet maintainer.

	Arnd <><

Re: [PATCHSET] libata: PATA driver for Celleb

[Linas Vepstas]

On Thu, Feb 15, 2007 at 07:09:25PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Thursday 15 February 2007 18:14, Linas Vepstas wrote:
> > > Linas has done a pretty good job on improving the driver in the last half
> > > year or so and he also has access to all the necessary hardware so I think
> > > he would be the right person for the job.
> > 
> > It seems I've been nominated twice. Since I'm expecting future activity
> > to drop to zero, how hard can this be? :-)
> 
> I fear that the hardest part is yet to come, 

Well, then, its a good thing I put a smiley face at the end of the
sentence, eh?

> when we integrate the
> driver for the the PS3 (currently called gelic_net) into spidernet.
> The trouble is that the hardware is sufficiently similar to share
> all the high-level mechanisms like the DMA data structures and
> descriptor chains, but the low-level mechanisms are hidden in the
> hypervisor on the PS3. Someone will have to invest a significant
> amount of time coordinating this so we don't break celleb and qs20
> in the process.

Since I've got the driver more or less memorized, I don't expect this
to be an intellectual challenge. Which sometimes has the side effect
of my getting bored, and dropping things on the floor.

> I also think that you'd do a good job doing this, but it may be
> more that what you are willing to do without official funding of the
> time you spend on it. 

(Ardnt knows that my spidernet work is "moonlighting", off-the-books 
work.)  I'll ask my employer.

> Of course the actual amount of work will
> depend a lot on the quality of the spidernet patches coming from
> Sony to the spidernet maintainer.

I guess I'll have to ask my employer for a ps3 that I can do 
some "research" on.

--linas

Re: [PATCHSET] libata: PATA driver for Celleb

[Benjamin Herrenschmidt]

> I can send a tested patch series (merging all three sources)
> immediately, assuming you like the tree these would be based on. 
> Any special instructions or proceedures to follow, any secret
> initiation rites, hazing, or change of citizenship required?

Just send the blast to our list first so I can verify that the
sungem_phy doesn't adversely affect sungem and everybody (especially Kou
sine you dn't have the Toshiba hardware, do you ?) can verify it all
works fine.

Cheers,
Ben

[PATCHSET] spidernet, sungem_phy: consolidated patch series

[Linas Vepstas]

On Fri, Feb 16, 2007 at 07:46:32AM +1100, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> 
> > I can send a tested patch series (merging all three sources)
> 
> Just send the blast to our list first so I can verify that the
> sungem_phy doesn't adversely affect sungem and everybody 

By "our list", I assume you mean "linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org". 
I'm going to severely trim the cc list at this point, and 
send a patch series of 12 shortly.  I'm going to pretend
as if I was maintainer (formalities on this side pending)
and attach a "signed-off-by" to each.  Ben, it'll be up to 
you to go/no-go; if you say "go", I'll repost to eff Garzik
(right?)

> (especially Kou
> sine you dn't have the Toshiba hardware, do you ?) can verify it all
> works fine.

I don't have Toshiba hardware. FWIW, I also don't have a ps3. 

--linas

Re: [PATCHSET] libata: PATA driver for Celleb

[Benjamin Herrenschmidt]

On Mon, 2007-02-19 at 21:56 +0000, Alan wrote:
> > I fear that the hardest part is yet to come, when we integrate the
> > driver for the the PS3 (currently called gelic_net) into spidernet.
> > The trouble is that the hardware is sufficiently similar to share
> > all the high-level mechanisms like the DMA data structures and
> > descriptor chains, but the low-level mechanisms are hidden in the
> > hypervisor on the PS3. Someone will have to invest a significant
> > amount of time coordinating this so we don't break celleb and qs20
> > in the process.
> 
> That to me implies they should be different drivers using a common
> libata-something file. The PPC mac drivers likewise are currently mashed
> into one in drivers/ide but really want splitting for libata with some
> kind of libata-pmac owning the shared stuff

You meand driver/ide/ppc/pmac.c ?

This driver is really for one family of IP blocks, the apple ones. They
have the same DMA engine and same taskfile register layout, they only
differ in the timning register format & timing abilities.

However, they also differ in probing mecanism because Apple has been
moving them out of the macio_asic to a PCI device at one point, so yes,
maybe you are right, I should move the DMA bits to some "common" file
and split the various implementations.

Ben.

Re: [PATCHSET] libata: PATA driver for Celleb

[Benjamin Herrenschmidt]

On Mon, 2007-02-19 at 21:56 +0000, Alan wrote:
> > I fear that the hardest part is yet to come, when we integrate the
> > driver for the the PS3 (currently called gelic_net) into spidernet.
> > The trouble is that the hardware is sufficiently similar to share
> > all the high-level mechanisms like the DMA data structures and
> > descriptor chains, but the low-level mechanisms are hidden in the
> > hypervisor on the PS3. Someone will have to invest a significant
> > amount of time coordinating this so we don't break celleb and qs20
> > in the process.
> 
> That to me implies they should be different drivers using a common
> libata-something file. The PPC mac drivers likewise are currently mashed
> into one in drivers/ide but really want splitting for libata with some
> kind of libata-pmac owning the shared stuff

Also note that for spidernet vs. gelic, I'm actually very tempted to
keep them as separate drivers.

Ben.

Re: [PATCHSET] libata: PATA driver for Celleb

[Alan]

> I fear that the hardest part is yet to come, when we integrate the
> driver for the the PS3 (currently called gelic_net) into spidernet.
> The trouble is that the hardware is sufficiently similar to share
> all the high-level mechanisms like the DMA data structures and
> descriptor chains, but the low-level mechanisms are hidden in the
> hypervisor on the PS3. Someone will have to invest a significant
> amount of time coordinating this so we don't break celleb and qs20
> in the process.

That to me implies they should be different drivers using a common
libata-something file. The PPC mac drivers likewise are currently mashed
into one in drivers/ide but really want splitting for libata with some
kind of libata-pmac owning the shared stuff

Alan

Re: [PATCHSET] libata: PATA driver for Celleb

[Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz]

On Tuesday 20 February 2007 00:46, Alan wrote:
> > > into one in drivers/ide but really want splitting for libata with some
> > > kind of libata-pmac owning the shared stuff
> > 
> > You meand driver/ide/ppc/pmac.c ?
> 
> Yes
> 
> > moving them out of the macio_asic to a PCI device at one point, so yes,
> > maybe you are right, I should move the DMA bits to some "common" file
> > and split the various implementations.
> 
> I suspect it is worth doing when moving to libata at least, even if not
> for the older driver.

fully agreed, the way to go for both drivers

Bart

Re: [PATCHSET] libata: PATA driver for Celleb

[Benjamin Herrenschmidt]

On Mon, 2007-02-19 at 23:46 +0000, Alan wrote:
> > > into one in drivers/ide but really want splitting for libata with some
> > > kind of libata-pmac owning the shared stuff
> > 
> > You meand driver/ide/ppc/pmac.c ?
> 
> Yes
> 
> > moving them out of the macio_asic to a PCI device at one point, so yes,
> > maybe you are right, I should move the DMA bits to some "common" file
> > and split the various implementations.
> 
> I suspect it is worth doing when moving to libata at least, even if not
> for the older driver.

Yup. I don't when I'll have time to "libataify" it though. I need to
look into the best way of handling hotplug with the mediabay for that.
The current hacks are only really suitable for drivers/ide

Ben.

Re: [PATCHSET] libata: PATA driver for Celleb

[Benjamin Herrenschmidt]

On Tue, 2007-02-20 at 00:17 +0100, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
> On Tuesday 20 February 2007 00:46, Alan wrote:
> > > > into one in drivers/ide but really want splitting for libata with some
> > > > kind of libata-pmac owning the shared stuff
> > > 
> > > You meand driver/ide/ppc/pmac.c ?
> > 
> > Yes
> > 
> > > moving them out of the macio_asic to a PCI device at one point, so yes,
> > > maybe you are right, I should move the DMA bits to some "common" file
> > > and split the various implementations.
> > 
> > I suspect it is worth doing when moving to libata at least, even if not
> > for the older driver.
> 
> fully agreed, the way to go for both drivers

I don't think it's worth touching the drivers/ide version.

Ben.

Re: [PATCHSET] libata: PATA driver for Celleb

[Alan]

> > into one in drivers/ide but really want splitting for libata with some
> > kind of libata-pmac owning the shared stuff
> 
> You meand driver/ide/ppc/pmac.c ?

Yes

> moving them out of the macio_asic to a PCI device at one point, so yes,
> maybe you are right, I should move the DMA bits to some "common" file
> and split the various implementations.

I suspect it is worth doing when moving to libata at least, even if not
for the older driver.

Alan

Re: [PATCHSET] libata: PATA driver for Celleb

[Geert Uytterhoeven]

On Mon, 19 Feb 2007, Alan wrote:
> > I fear that the hardest part is yet to come, when we integrate the
> > driver for the the PS3 (currently called gelic_net) into spidernet.
> > The trouble is that the hardware is sufficiently similar to share
> > all the high-level mechanisms like the DMA data structures and
> > descriptor chains, but the low-level mechanisms are hidden in the
> > hypervisor on the PS3. Someone will have to invest a significant
> > amount of time coordinating this so we don't break celleb and qs20
> > in the process.
> 
> That to me implies they should be different drivers using a common
> libata-something file. The PPC mac drivers likewise are currently mashed
> into one in drivers/ide but really want splitting for libata with some
> kind of libata-pmac owning the shared stuff

FYI, the gelic_net and spidernet drivers Arnd was talking about are _Ethernet_
drivers, not (S)ATA drivers.

That's what happens to the casual reader when the email subjects no longer
match ;-)

Gr{oetje,eeting}s,

						Geert

--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- Sony Network and Software Technology Center Europe (NSCE)
Geert.Uytterhoeven@sonycom.com ------- The Corporate Village, Da Vincilaan 7-D1
Voice +32-2-7008453 Fax +32-2-7008622 ---------------- B-1935 Zaventem, Belgium