From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tejun Heo Subject: Re: [2.6 patch] select ATA_SFF Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2008 22:24:05 +0900 Message-ID: <480DE6F5.8060403@gmail.com> References: <20080421213147.GH2633@cs181133002.pp.htv.fi> <480DE3C4.5@ru.mvista.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from wr-out-0506.google.com ([64.233.184.226]:17558 "EHLO wr-out-0506.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754520AbYDVNYN (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 Apr 2008 09:24:13 -0400 Received: by wr-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id c48so1206541wra.1 for ; Tue, 22 Apr 2008 06:24:13 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <480DE3C4.5@ru.mvista.com> Sender: linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org To: Sergei Shtylyov Cc: Jeff Garzik , Adrian Bunk , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-ide@vger.kernel.org Hi, Sergei Shtylyov wrote: > ADMA is not SFF-8038i compilant, it's the IDE DMA spec of its own. > And I'm seeing references to libata-sff.c... confusing. In libata, SFF is used for controllers which have TF interface and BMDMA is used for the BMDMA part of SFF-8038i. I think this is the source of confusion here. > Looks like there's no clean separation within libata-sff.c itself > between SFF-8038i (BMDMA spec) and IDE registers itself -- that confused > me: at first I thought there's a big issue with a patch. :-/ > > Jeff, Tejun, what "sff" in the file name actually means? Isn't it > strange that the drivers lacking DMA support or not really compliant > with SFF-8038i have to link with this file? Maybe it should be libata-tf and libata-bmdma, but sff (sans bmdma) and bmdma is acceptable, hopefully, right? Thanks. -- tejun