From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753358AbZHPMxk (ORCPT ); Sun, 16 Aug 2009 08:53:40 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753018AbZHPMxj (ORCPT ); Sun, 16 Aug 2009 08:53:39 -0400 Received: from srv5.dvmed.net ([207.36.208.214]:39973 "EHLO mail.dvmed.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752497AbZHPMxg (ORCPT ); Sun, 16 Aug 2009 08:53:36 -0400 Message-ID: <4A88014D.9060309@garzik.org> Date: Sun, 16 Aug 2009 08:53:33 -0400 From: Jeff Garzik User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.21 (X11/20090320) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Subbrathnam, Swaminathan" CC: Sergei Shtylyov , "linux-ide@vger.kernel.org" , LKML Subject: Re: sata AHCI controller over non-PCI bus References: <4A7FE245.8020002@ru.mvista.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: -4.4 (----) X-Spam-Report: SpamAssassin version 3.2.5 on srv5.dvmed.net summary: Content analysis details: (-4.4 points, 5.0 required) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subbrathnam, Swaminathan wrote: > Jeff, > From the below link (from Sergei) it seems that you have already re-factored the AHCI implementation dependency on PCI. I would like to add support for the OMAPL138 SATA on top of your changes. That would be the ideal way forward for me. > > Have the ahci re-factoring changes queued for mainline merge already? I just joined the list and hence do not know the status. > > Sergei, > Appreciate the response. I store the refactoring in git, on the "libahci" branch of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/jgarzik/libata-dev.git Unfortunately, I am having second thoughts about an element of the current design. With current Linux distributions, they do not appear to deal well with the multi-module dependency libata -> libahci -> ahci. If I had to guess, I would say that mkinitrd creation tools only look at one tree level's worth of kernel module dependencies. Thus, ahci would wind up -not- in initrd, in a libahci solution. I am thinking that I will just add Marvell and ATP support to ahci.c, and let someone else deal with libahci separation -- which is still needed. At this point, I would rather get Marvell/ATP support into users' hands, rather than wait for distros to catch up to modern technology. Jeff