Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <bzolnier@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > The change itself looks good but IMO it is worth doing it before patch #2/3 > (it would also make it possible for me to merge this patch immediately). Yes, I should have considered that the earlier #2/3 needs coordination between you and Jeff. > When it comes to patch #2 - Alan's comment may be a bit harsh but he seems > to be right - there should be a common library-like file (ata-blacklist.c > or ata-quirks.c or whatever name you like) containing ata_device_blacklist[]. > > This would require slight modification of ide_in_drive_list() to teach > it about ATA_HORKAGE_DMA ... Please also note that <linux/ata.h> is used by both > IDE and libata so it should be a good place to put struct ata_blacklist_entry > and ATA_HORKAGE_* macros. Thanks for the hint. Alan is correct to point out that I cheated. ;-) If I understand correctly, the change would involve: - create a new file that has ata_device_blacklist[] whose type is "struct ata_blacklist_entry" (i.e. matches libata-core), by separating the table out of ata/libata-core.c. Q1. should that file go to drivers/ata/ or drivers/ide/? - make that file depended on when either libata and/or IDE is selected. Q2. Kconfig dependency rule is needed for this, perhaps. How should that look like? - some out-of-tree drivers might be using ide_in_drive_list() and relying on it to take "struct drive_list_entry"; create a new function, ide_in_device_list(), that takes "struct ata_blacklist_entry" as its parameter. Q3. Is the 'out-of-tree drivers' a real issue, and if so, is the above a reasonable avenue to take? - convert in-tree callers to use ide_in_device_list() instead, feeding it ata_device_blacklist[], and remove drive_blacklist[] from drivers/ide/ide-dma.c. Q4. What would you like to do for drive_whitelist[]? > Care to respin both patches? Before the questions are answered I cannot respin the earlier #2/3, but I can certainly respin #3/3. - 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
