From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1763348AbYDVNYX (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 Apr 2008 09:24:23 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1755983AbYDVNYO (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 Apr 2008 09:24:14 -0400 Received: from rv-out-0708.google.com ([209.85.198.248]:10537 "EHLO rv-out-0506.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753399AbYDVNYN (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 Apr 2008 09:24:13 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject:references:in-reply-to:x-enigmail-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=J5LYTiB8xYM0jiOQ4Gob57cHtA+pZ765SL/hM2x+OBxRrN1do/I0wbFOB9K45UheOT02dz19fpdJblBZgrTfDJLMBjIkrVPg4TC5Rz9TmzhNf1OvcpAzC0OzIc0cFRsgymulKINZySAtAhh70u9vUTvQLOtIQ7I6X7ZhSxP+ZG4= Message-ID: <480DE6F5.8060403@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2008 22:24:05 +0900 From: Tejun Heo User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.12 (X11/20080226) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Sergei Shtylyov CC: Jeff Garzik , Adrian Bunk , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-ide@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [2.6 patch] select ATA_SFF References: <20080421213147.GH2633@cs181133002.pp.htv.fi> <480DE3C4.5@ru.mvista.com> In-Reply-To: <480DE3C4.5@ru.mvista.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi, Sergei Shtylyov wrote: > ADMA is not SFF-8038i compilant, it's the IDE DMA spec of its own. > And I'm seeing references to libata-sff.c... confusing. In libata, SFF is used for controllers which have TF interface and BMDMA is used for the BMDMA part of SFF-8038i. I think this is the source of confusion here. > Looks like there's no clean separation within libata-sff.c itself > between SFF-8038i (BMDMA spec) and IDE registers itself -- that confused > me: at first I thought there's a big issue with a patch. :-/ > > Jeff, Tejun, what "sff" in the file name actually means? Isn't it > strange that the drivers lacking DMA support or not really compliant > with SFF-8038i have to link with this file? Maybe it should be libata-tf and libata-bmdma, but sff (sans bmdma) and bmdma is acceptable, hopefully, right? Thanks. -- tejun