Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz 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. :)
And I've spent considerable time fixing this driver in 2.4.20. :-)
[ 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.
Don't think that there's even enough common code for hpt3xx_main.c.
identification poilicy used by the vendor, the latter has no justification at all.
Patches are always warmly welcomed.
There is just to much I'd like to be done with this driver and too little time to do that. :-)
Thanks, Bart
MBR, 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
