From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff Garzik Subject: Re: [2.6 patch] select ATA_SFF Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2008 00:21:04 -0400 Message-ID: <480EB930.1040308@garzik.org> References: <20080421213147.GH2633@cs181133002.pp.htv.fi> <480DE3C4.5@ru.mvista.com> <480DE6F5.8060403@gmail.com> <480DE9E8.2070809@ru.mvista.com> <480DEB1F.5060500@gmail.com> <480DF7B7.9030000@rtr.ca> <480DF876.7070800@gmail.com> <480DF9BD.1080104@rtr.ca> <480DFE76.8000809@ru.mvista.com> <480E345D.9090406@ru.mvista.com> <480E9C15.6080103@gmail.com> 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]:50618 "EHLO mail.dvmed.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751045AbYDWEVQ (ORCPT ); Wed, 23 Apr 2008 00:21:16 -0400 In-Reply-To: <480E9C15.6080103@gmail.com> Sender: linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org To: Tejun Heo Cc: Sergei Shtylyov , Mark Lord , Adrian Bunk , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-ide@vger.kernel.org, Alan Cox Tejun Heo wrote: > Aik... We can do s/sff/tf/ and leave bmdma alone to avoid even more > confusion but sff has meant tf base interface for quite some time now in > libata and I think it'll be better to remember that sff is the new tf. > Sorry about the mess. This renaming was discussed at the time on lkml and linux-ide, the patches and git pushes were CC'd, and I do not recall these complaints being raised at the time. At this point, it's too ingrained in libata. Another rename would IMO just cause more needless churn. Jeff