Re: [PATCH] libata queue updated

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Ingo Oeser wrote:
Hi Jeff,


On Saturday 28 January 2006 19:25, Jeff Garzik wrote:
Testing and merge point in Tejun's flood of patches :)  The patch
below is against current linux-2.6.git.

These "function(unsigned int *classes)" style functions in "libata-core.c" worry me somewhat. Esp. that sometimes you have one class,
sometimes two.
This looks like a bug waiting to happen for me.

Could we somehow get a
struct ata_classes {
	unsigned int master;
	unsigned int slave;
}

here (or similiar), before this is in used everywhere?

Usage would be function(struct ata_classes *classes) then.


Hello,

I object. Using array is intentional. Slave aware controllers (PATA / ata_piix) will use [0..1], most SATA controllers will use only [0], and PM aware ones will use [0..15]. The intention was requiring low level drivers of only what they know and normalize them in the core layer.

eg. Current std SATA reset routines consider the argument as *class (a single class value) and it's intentional. As long as a lldd is aware of only one device per port, it's allowed/recommeded to consider the passed classes argument as a pointer to single class value. The rest is upto the core libata layer.

--
tejun
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]
  Powered by Linux