Hello, On 08/18/2010 12:03 PM, Alan Cox wrote: >> Sure, the thing is that your patch doesn't mean we don't have to keep >> ata_piix device table up-to-date. We would still need to be >> maintaining that table whether ata_generic can detect IDE-R by itself > > I'm not sure I follow I was trying to say that IDE-R basically being the complement of Intel IDE's not drive by ata_piix, we don't need to maintain a separate PCI device ID table for IDE-R's. >> or not. The device ID table in ata_piix is given, and ata_generic >> picking up the rest of intel IDE's wouldn't miss anything. So, unless >> IDE-R devices need some special treatment, I don't really see how the >> detection code would be useful. > > The trend is towards AHCI so the problem goes away for the other bits. Yeah, it has helped a lot but ata_piix's are here to stay for the foreseeable future and we'll be maintaining its device ID table. > IDE-R is not ata_piix drivable, and lots of the ICH stuff really wants > driving via ata_piix, so having the generic driver grab all intel stuff > isn't as far as I can see going to be safe given a system may load the > ata_generic module but not PIIX then meet a piix by hotplug. That's the reason why we have module priorities. The link priority becomes module priority and modprobe will deterministically prefer ata_piix over ata_generic if a controller is supported by both. Thanks. -- tejun -- 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
