On Friday 06 February 2009, Sergei Shtylyov wrote: > Hello, I wrote: > > >> Can you answer the simple question: why we should try to support > >> two incompatible chips with a single driver? Because the driver name > >> will be shorter? :-) > > > >> Very funny. I think patch adding RM9200 support to this driver will > >> have less > >> than 50 lines changeset, whereas writing new driver would be about > >> 500 lines. > > > > This approach is so broken-minded that I'm just out words to argue > > any more. > > > > Let's then support say all the PCI IDE chipsets with the single > > driver (actully, there was a driver that tried to support 2 > > incompatible Promise chip families but it got split finally). Actually it was the case for Linux during early 2.4.x days. :) [ Probably for historical reasons. ] > To say the truth, there are stil at least 2 examples of such drivers: > hpt366 and aec6210. While the former is justified by the bogus chip The former can be probably still improved with hpt3xx_main.c and chipset family specific code separated into hpt36x.c etc. > identification poilicy used by the vendor, the latter has no > justification at all. Patches are always warmly welcomed. 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
