From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff Garzik Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/21] advansys: Convert to EISA driver model Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 10:55:39 -0400 Message-ID: <46AA076B.5070002@garzik.org> References: <11854705772-git-send-email-matthew@wil.cx> <46A8F850.3070102@garzik.org> <20070726203748.GR19275@parisc-linux.org> <46A9F842.6040209@garzik.org> <20070727141652.GE21219@parisc-linux.org> 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]:58479 "EHLO mail.dvmed.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932815AbXG0Ozk (ORCPT ); Fri, 27 Jul 2007 10:55:40 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20070727141652.GE21219@parisc-linux.org> Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: Matthew Wilcox Cc: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org Matthew Wilcox wrote: > On Fri, Jul 27, 2007 at 09:50:58AM -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote: >>> Would it make sense to put in a comment that says "No idea why we do this"? >> IMO, yes. It should be noticeable at the very least. > > Added to todo for next spin of these patches. > >>>> 5) I would suggest putting a "remove inpw/outpw pointless wrappers" >>>> cleanup patch before patches #2 .. #N. >>> Next thing on my todo list is to convert the driver over to ioread8 and >>> friends. Currently, only the wide boards get accessed through PCIMEM, >>> but the narrow boards also have PCIMEM BARs. It would also allow the wide >>> boards to be used on machines where PCIMEM is broken, like the VisWS. >> PCIMEM versus PCIMEM... huh? > > This driver is really two drivers in one -- the wide boards and the > narrow boards. Christoph is working on a new driver for the wide boards > only, and once he's finished that, I'll delete the support for the wide > boards in this driver. > > Right now, only the wide boards get to take advantage of PCIMEM. I want > to give the narrow boards (like the one I have) the opportunity to take > advantage of PCIMEM, if they have it. There's also a pending todo for > wide boards to fall back to ioports if PCIMEM doesn't work. > > If that doesn't answer your question, I need something more detailed > than "huh?" ;-) Your earlier statement was just confusing. You basically said "if PCIMEM doesn't work, we should fall back to PCIMEM" if I read it correctly. I think you meant falling back to ioports, but wanted to clarify. Jeff