On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 12:00:05PM +0100, Russell King wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 01:48:36PM +0300, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 10:59:16AM +0100, Russell King wrote:
> > > On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 12:37:53PM +0300, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > > > Any objections against the patch below?
> > >
> > > Let's look at the rest of the situation surrounding HAVE_IDE first.
> > > It's something of a mess:
> > >
> > > avr32, m68knommu, ppc, s390 and v850 do not have asm/ide.h
> > >
> > > avr32, m68knommu, ppc, v850 all set HAVE_IDE, arch/s390/Kconfig contains
> > > no reference.
> > >
> > > avr32 supports PATA (which is IDE).
> > >
> > > Everything else provides an asm/ide.h and sets HAVE_IDE.
> > >
> > > So:
> > >
> > > Q1. Do avr32, m68knommu, ppc, v850 have IDE support or do they not?
> >
> > avr32 is fixed in 2.6.25 (no more HAVE_IDE)
>
> avr32 has ATA, so the only reason it doesn't actually use IDE is because
> they're using libata entirely. This is NO different from the situation
> on ARM - some machine classes use entirely libata, others use IDE, and
> some others are trying to give up IDE in favour of libata.
You have a point that one might argue that avr32 should also select
HAVE_IDE and get an asm/ide.h .
The main difference between avr32 and arm is that on arm there are a
bunch of platforms that actually want to use drivers/ide/ at the moment,
and the fine-grained select's we have at the moment don't bring any real
gain.
I do actually not care much how this gets resolved (we could even
ditch HAVE_IDE and provide asm/ide.h on all architectures) if there's
general agreement that this is the way to go.
> Russell King
cu
Adrian
--
"Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
"Only a promise," Lao Er said.
Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed
--
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
