From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tejun Heo Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] ata: Intel IDE-R support Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2010 18:30:17 +0200 Message-ID: <4C6AB919.7060203@kernel.org> References: <20100810155559.7620.79711.stgit@localhost.localdomain> <4C6AB68D.8000102@kernel.org> <20100817174257.3691ed68@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from hera.kernel.org ([140.211.167.34]:38544 "EHLO hera.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750713Ab0HQQdo (ORCPT ); Tue, 17 Aug 2010 12:33:44 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20100817174257.3691ed68@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> Sender: linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org To: Alan Cox Cc: Alan Cox , linux-ide@vger.kernel.org, jeff@garzik.org Hello, On 08/17/2010 06:42 PM, Alan Cox wrote: >> This looks scary to me. Is this something documented somewhere? It's >> not like we can avoid adding PCI device IDs completely anyway, so I >> would suggest just doing it good old fashioned way. > > The trouble with adding all the ids is it will keep needing updates every > chipset (and a lot of existing idents). But we do that for some controllers anyway so it's not something new. ata_piix already has list of all the devices it supports, so maybe it's safe to grab all intel IDE devices from ata_generic? ata_piix always has higher priority than ata_generic anyway and if a device isn't grabbed by ata_piix, we don't lose anything by grabbing it from ata_generic. > Is it documented ? The instructions it was written to came from the > people who do the chips. Yeap, that's much better, but I still think it would be better to avoid such detection magics if possible. Thanks. -- tejun