Mark Lord wrote:
Jeff, Tejun, what "sff" in the file name actually means? Isn't
it strange that the drivers lacking DMA support or not really
compliant with SFF-8038i have to link with this file?
Maybe it should be libata-tf and libata-bmdma, but sff (sans bmdma)
and bmdma is acceptable, hopefully, right?
What's sff sans bmdma?
Supposed to be TF interface. IIRC, the SFF term was first from Alan
although it's entirely possible that I misunderstood it and used it
in the wrong way. Alan, can you please clear up the confusion?
The SFF/Intel spec is for PCI IDE (BMDMA or otherwise), so it covers and
defines all the common bits of the IDE interface on PCI (and in defining
the legacy interface conveniently documents the extended ST-412
interface
used by ATA and "pre-ATA" IDE/EIDE controllers).
If you mean SFF-8038i (which can indeed be named "SFF/Intel"), it
documents *only* BMDMA. If you mean something else, please be more
precise.
..
The "Intel PCI IDE Controller Specification Revision 1.0 3/4/94" doesn't
This is not an SFF spec.
mention
bmdma at all, but does document the taskfile register addresses.
It defers to ATA-1 for actual taskfile descriptions/functionality, though.
Yes, it only describes deviation from "historical" IDE, i.e. the missing
drive address register (port 0x3[7F]7).
There's nothing particularly bad about the current naming we use, though.
There wouldn't have been anything bad if that file wasn't covering both
taskfile and BMDMA stuff. This way, it looks misleading (at least for me).
Cheers
WBR, Sergei
--
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
