On Tuesday 21 of April 2009 17:19:33 Alan Cox wrote: > > http://www.palm.com/us/support/contact/environment/disassem_inst_Lifedriv > >e.pdf , see slide 10 and 15 for yourself, I think noone would want to > > solder anything into that device ;-) > > Agreed but if the hardware can do it you don't need the flag. Obviously > not very important in this case. OK, we can remove that, I'll resend the patch. > > > > + /* we'd better wait for drive's ready signal here > > > + (if we knew where it will come from) */ > > > + msleep(300); > > > > > > Our probe code should already be waiting for ready signals ? > > > > The drive asserts some GPIO when it becomes ready, dunno which one though > > so we just wait here. > > Ok so the ATA bus side ready isn't sufficient for your hardware ? I can retry without the delay, but I'm quite afraid I ran into problems without it. Btw. I rewrote that driver more than half year ago, so I don't really recall the details, sorry, I don't want to misinform you here. > > > > The only other question is a general architectural one as to whether it > > > would be better to set up the GPIO etc and create a pata_platform > > > platform device (possibly tweaking pata_platform flags to allow the > > > caller to indicate generic pio with mode setting by set features > > > command) > > > > I already explained this to Eric, there isn't any other obscure hardware > > I think. Or if this is concerning something else, I'll recheck later. -- 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
