Jeff Garzik wrote: > Alan Cox wrote: >>> * promise: SATA/PATA branches are converted into separate ops. >>> Remaining ones are converted to more standard ap->cbl == >>> ATA_CBL_SATA check. >> >> NAK this specifically >> >> I've got some pending and needed patches to spot where drives report SATA >> and the host is doing PATA cables. This is needed for various warped PATA >> controller and glue variants and means that the PATA port probe may end >> up returning with ap->cbl == ATA_CBL_SATA if it finds SATA devices on a >> supposedly PATA port. > > Indeed. > > With the new init model, testing for ATA_FLAG_SATA should be the > preferred test, as it makes all the mixed PATA/SATA ->port_start hackery > and tests go away. > > With the new init model, the LLDD and core should now /always/ know > whether the port is PATA or SATA. The LLDD will set it up that way. > > Now that different ->ops for PATA and SATA is supported (with Tejun's > patches), I would expect the number of "is this port SATA?" tests to > drop dramatically, for reasons mentioned in the previous paragraph and > also because you can create separate hooks for PATA and SATA that > permits the killing of "is this SATA?" or "is this PATA?" tests. I see. I'll drop that part. Thanks. -- tejun - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ide" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
