From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list linux-mips); Mon, 24 Nov 2008 20:41:31 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mail3.caviumnetworks.com ([12.108.191.235]:26367 "EHLO mail3.caviumnetworks.com") by ftp.linux-mips.org with ESMTP id S23894393AbYKXUlX (ORCPT ); Mon, 24 Nov 2008 20:41:23 +0000 Received: from exch4.caveonetworks.com (Not Verified[192.168.16.23]) by mail3.caviumnetworks.com with MailMarshal (v6,2,2,3503) id ; Mon, 24 Nov 2008 15:40:55 -0500 Received: from exch4.caveonetworks.com ([192.168.16.23]) by exch4.caveonetworks.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Mon, 24 Nov 2008 12:40:52 -0800 Received: from dd1.caveonetworks.com ([64.169.86.201]) by exch4.caveonetworks.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Mon, 24 Nov 2008 12:40:52 -0800 Message-ID: <492B1153.5080001@caviumnetworks.com> Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2008 12:40:51 -0800 From: David Daney User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.16 (X11/20080723) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Alan Cox CC: Sergei Shtylyov , linux-ide@vger.kernel.org, linux-mips Subject: Re: [PATCH] ide: New libata driver for OCTEON SOC Compact Flash interface. References: <49261BE5.2010406@caviumnetworks.com> <49280FC5.3040608@ru.mvista.com> <20081122145204.52270dbe@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> In-Reply-To: <20081122145204.52270dbe@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-OriginalArrivalTime: 24 Nov 2008 20:40:52.0070 (UTC) FILETIME=[F0D91060:01C94E74] Return-Path: X-Envelope-To: <"|/home/ecartis/ecartis -s linux-mips"> (uid 0) X-Orcpt: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org Original-Recipient: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org X-archive-position: 21406 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org Errors-to: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org X-original-sender: ddaney@caviumnetworks.com Precedence: bulk X-list: linux-mips Alan Cox wrote: >> But if you're saying that there is only DMA completion inetrrupt, you >> *cannot* completely emulate SFF-8038i BMDMA since its interrupt status >> is the (delayed) IDE INTRQ status. I suggest that you move away from the >> emulation -- Alan has said it's possible. > > I don't see whats wrong with treating it that way if it keeps the amount > of code needed down. > For exactly that reason, I intend to continue to try to emulate it. David Daney