[U-Boot] any value in moving ATA/SATA stuff from drivers/block to headers?

[U-Boot] any value in moving ATA/SATA stuff from drivers/block to headers?

[Robert P. J. Day]

  currently poking around in drivers/block, adding a driver for
another silicon image drive, and noticed that sata_sil3114.h has some
content that looks more appropriate for a generic ATA/SATA header
file.

 for example, this snippet:

/* Missing ata defines */
#define ATA_CMD_STANDBY                 0xE2
#define ATA_CMD_STANDBYNOW1             0xE0
#define ATA_CMD_IDLE                    0xE3
#define ATA_CMD_IDLEIMMEDIATE   0xE1

seems already covered by include/libata.h, while the earlier structure
definitions in that file:

struct sata_ioports {
... snip ...
};

struct sata_port {
... snip ...
};

also look like they could be moved to a generic SATA-related header
file. does that make any sense or sound like it has any value?

rday

-- 

========================================================================
Robert P. J. Day                                 Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA
                        http://crashcourse.ca

Twitter:                                       http://twitter.com/rpjday
LinkedIn:                               http://ca.linkedin.com/in/rpjday
========================================================================

[U-Boot] any value in moving ATA/SATA stuff from drivers/block to headers?

[Tom Rini]

On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 08:02:26AM -0500, Robert P. J. Day wrote:

> 
>   currently poking around in drivers/block, adding a driver for
> another silicon image drive, and noticed that sata_sil3114.h has some
> content that looks more appropriate for a generic ATA/SATA header
> file.
> 
>  for example, this snippet:
> 
> /* Missing ata defines */
> #define ATA_CMD_STANDBY                 0xE2
> #define ATA_CMD_STANDBYNOW1             0xE0
> #define ATA_CMD_IDLE                    0xE3
> #define ATA_CMD_IDLEIMMEDIATE   0xE1
> 
> seems already covered by include/libata.h, while the earlier structure
> definitions in that file:
> 
> struct sata_ioports {
> ... snip ...
> };
> 
> struct sata_port {
> ... snip ...
> };
> 
> also look like they could be moved to a generic SATA-related header
> file. does that make any sense or sound like it has any value?

Less stuff in files will make DM easier eventually so yes.

-- 
Tom
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/attachments/20160114/ac95f0ec/attachment.sig>