On Saturday 06 December 2008, Alan Cox wrote: > > I think that for the time being it is best to just proceed with the removal > > and see if there are any users needing the driver (+ we should probably try > > SCSI/libata/osst path first). > > Far better to just leave it there. It generally works for users so all Unfortunately "generally" here means that once there is some more advanced driver functionality needed (i.e. error handling) it fails in the major way... Thus leaving it there is confusing for users which are better using either IDE native drivers or libata. It is also a waste of time on part of both IDE and SCSI people. Still, we can certainly leave ide-scsi there if you or somebody else want to maintain it (which didn't happen for the last year). It would be best to start with fixing years long issues with error handling and taking the work on updating driver for IDE changes off my shoulder... > you are doing is creating a regression with no possible benefit (other > than encouraging people to move to libata so we can obsolete all of > drivers/ide - which is what we really need to do and move the last few > users over) Please don't put my in the same box as I see no value added by libata PATA to vast majority of IDE users. However I certainly commend that you want to take care of the last few OnStream users... Thanks, Bart -- 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
