From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Arnd Bergmann Subject: Re: [PATCH] ata: libata depends on HAS_DMA Date: Tue, 12 May 2009 11:23:20 +0200 Message-ID: <200905121123.21436.arnd@arndb.de> References: <20090511222702.352192505@arndb.de> <200905112238.55404.arnd@arndb.de> <20090512090602.65722342@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20090512090602.65722342@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> Content-Disposition: inline Sender: linux-m68k-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-m68k@vger.kernel.org To: Alan Cox Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Jeff Garzik , linux-ide@vger.kernel.org, takata@linux-m32r.org, geert@linux-m68k.org, linux-m68k@lists.linux-m68k.org, ysato@users.sourceforge.jp On Tuesday 12 May 2009, Alan Cox wrote: > Nakked-by: Alan Cox > > Almost every PATA adapter can fall back to PIO, many are PIO only. We > need a rather cleaner way to sort this. Currently, the only architectures that don't set HAS_DMA are h8300, m32r m68k (except SUN3 and Coldfire), microblaze and s390. s390 will never get it, microblaze is currently implementing dma-mapping.h. The other three are still using drivers/ide instead of drivers/ata. One way to fix this would be to implement dma-mapping.h in h8300, m32r and m68k and leave !HAS_DMA as the obscure s390 case (this one already can't use ATA because of !HAS_MMIO). The other way would be to add some #ifdef CONFIG_HAS_DMA in libata-core.c and sas_ata.c. Arnd <>< Arnd <><