From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S263823AbTLASGe (ORCPT ); Mon, 1 Dec 2003 13:06:34 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S263850AbTLASGe (ORCPT ); Mon, 1 Dec 2003 13:06:34 -0500 Received: from 64-60-248-67.cust.telepacific.net ([64.60.248.67]:32239 "EHLO mx.rackable.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S263823AbTLASGc (ORCPT ); Mon, 1 Dec 2003 13:06:32 -0500 Message-ID: <3FCB8312.3050703@rackable.com> Date: Mon, 01 Dec 2003 10:06:10 -0800 From: Samuel Flory User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.5) Gecko/20031007 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Marcelo Tosatti CC: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Jeff Garzik Subject: Re: libata in 2.4.24? References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-OriginalArrivalTime: 01 Dec 2003 18:06:30.0087 (UTC) FILETIME=[D8759D70:01C3B835] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Marcelo Tosatti wrote: > > On Sat, 29 Nov 2003, Marcelo Tosatti wrote: > > >> >>On Sat, 29 Nov 2003, Samuel Flory wrote: >> >> >>> Are you considering including libata support for 2.4.24? From my >>>testing with a number of different embedded sata chipsets (mostly ICH, >>>SI, and Promise) it appears very stable. I'm not seeing any data >>>corruption or lockups when running Cerberus with 2.4.23-rc5 + libata >>>patch. The only troubles I've had were with initialization of embedded >>>promise sata controllers. (I still need to test with Jeff's latest fixes >>>for this.) >> >>I'm happy to include it in 2.4 when Jeff thinks its stable enough for a >>stable series. ;) > > > I thought a bit more about this issue and I have a different opinion now. > > 2.6 is getting more and more stable and already includes libata --- users > who need it should use 2.6. While I agree that 2.6 is looking better every day. I've been running my desktop on it for sometime. I'm not sure agree we should be forcing people to use 2.6 simply to be able to read their hard drive. It's getting harder to find a newly released motherboard without onboard sata. Not having libata support means that anyone running 2.4 unpatched will be unable to use such systems. -- There is no such thing as obsolete hardware. Merely hardware that other people don't want. (The Second Rule of Hardware Acquisition) Sam Flory