On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 5:11 AM, Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> Likely a lot of the existing specific PCI IDs could be removed from the >> driver because of this (many likely predate the addition of the >> class-based catch-all). The only reason to need a specific entry if the >> device uses AHCI class is if it needs special handling or workarounds, >> which isn't the case here. > > Well, two lines of thinking here: > > * some of lines of Intel chips do not separate AHCI into a separate PCI ID > rather legacy IDE interface. When an AHCI interface exists and AHCI/IDE > share the same PCI ID, we default to using AHCI. Thus, some of those PCI ID > matches in ahci.c's PCI table may not get caught by the generic PCI class > match at the end of the table. Well, ata_piix does have a couple of entries that are listed in ahci as well, for ICH6 device IDs 0x2652 and 0x2653. For 0x2653 ata_piix checks the class code to make sure it's IDE, but for the 0x2652 entry, and in both cases in ahci, the class code isn't checked. Deleting the specific entries from ahci for those controllers would seemingly actually improve the situation, since then ahci wouldn't try and attach to those devices when they indicate IDE class. ata_piix should also should be checking for IDE class on 0x2652 as well. -- 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
