Re: [RESEND PATCH] arm: assabet_defconfig: disable IDE subsystem

Kevin Hilman
2016-07-15T15:15:51Z

Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> writes:

> On Wednesday, July 13, 2016 12:59:23 PM CEST Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
>>
>> On Friday, July 08, 2016 10:23:48 PM Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>> > On Friday, July 8, 2016 5:24:41 PM CEST Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
>> > > This patch disables deprecated IDE subsystem in assabet_defconfig
>> > > (no IDE host drivers are selected in this config so there is no
>> > > valid reason to enable IDE subsystem itself).
>> > >
>> > > Cc: Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov <dbaryshkov@gmail.com>
>> > > Signed-off-by: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <b.zolnierkie@samsung.com>
>> >
>> > I think the series makes a lot of sense. I have checked your assertions
>> > in the changelogs and found no flaws in your logic, so I think we should
>> > take them all through arm-soc unless there are other concerns.
>>
>> Thank you.
>>
>> Should I resend everything or just patches that were not reposted yet
>> (the ones that were marked as RFT initially and got no feedback)?
>
> I'd be fine with just getting a pull request with all the patches that
> had no negative feedback and that were not already applied (if any).
>
>> > Do you have a list of ARM defconfigs that keep using CONFIG_IDE and
>> > how you determined that they need it?
>>
>> The only such defconfig is davinci_all_defconfig which uses
>> palm_bk3710 host driver (CONFIG_BLK_DEV_PALMCHIP_BK3710).
>>
>> > I know that ARCH_RPC/ARCH_ACORN has a couple of special drivers that
>> > have no libata replacement, are there any others like that, or are
>> > they all platforms that should in theory work with libata but need
>> > testing?
>>
>> All platforms except ARCH_ACORN, ARCH_DAVINCI & ARCH_RPC should work
>> with libata.
>
> Adding Sekhar and Kevin for DaVinci: At first sight, palm_bk3710 looks
> fairly straightforward (meaning someone has to do a few day's work)
> to convert into a libata driver.
>
> As this is on on-chip controller that is part of a dm644x and dm646x,
> it should also not be hard to test (as long as someone can find
> a hard drive to plug in).

I have a hard drive, but don't have any dm64xx hardware anymore to test
this. My last working dm644x board died last year.

Kevin