Hello, On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 12:07:21AM -0600, Joey Lee wrote: > Sorry bother you for about support SATA ODD zero power in kernel. > > Henry didn't reply me. > Could you please kindly give any comment for this topic? > > Looks the SATA ODD zero power didn't have good power reserve number, > does that mean support it in Linux kernel is not worthwhile? Well, 0.1-0.2w is not nothing. It could be meaningful I guess, but the concern that I have are... * How wildly is it gonna be deployed? Most ultraportables don't have ODDs to begin with and extra features in ATA land tend to be very cumbersome to deploy. It usually ends up like - half of them reporting the supportq incorrectly, quarter of them malfunction when enabled and so on. * Why is software involved in this at all? The device needs to process the eject button to begin with. I don't really see why ACPI or operating system needs to be involved here at all. What prevents ODD from implementing it itself? Is there any fundamental reason why OS should be involved? The thing is that if it isn't essential, people aren't gonna implement it anyway and we just end up with unused code. 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
