Friday 16 January 2009 14:32:05 Sergei Shtylyov napisał(a): > > You really don't want to put special board specific code in generic > > locations. In the libata case you don't need to and I think in the ide > > case you can avoid it too by wrapping the IRQ handler. > > Unfortunately, it seems you can't wrap ide_intr(), at least with the > current code. Perhaps only EXPORT_SYMBOL is missed. There is some ide_intr lock function, but it is only used for m68k. > > Libata also supports polled mode. > > > > Yeah. Stanslaw, I'd (have to) advise going the libata way in this > case -- in case you want to avoid the additional trouble of porting this > broken-minded IRQ implementation to the IDE core... I think, I will try to add AT91 stuff for pata_at91 to have this hardware support in mineline. I will also finish at91_ide for my company usage with older kernel. > Stanislaw's patch is adding the DIOx- to address hold time (t9) to > the existing ones. While there's has been already a patch by David Daney > adding this timing to libata (however, the author have ditched this idea > finally), the table in ide-timings.c still misses it, as well as the PIO > mode 6 timings... I use t9 for calculating memory controller settings, but maybe it is unneeded, pata_at91 don't use this value. Cheers Stanislaw Gruszka -- 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
