On 8/16/05, Bjorn Helgaas <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Tuesday 16 August 2005 3:38 am, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
> > On 8/15/05, Bjorn Helgaas <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > On Friday 12 August 2005 2:40 am, Alan Cox wrote:
> > Agreed but I have few comments:
> > * is this change OK w.r.t. IA64_HP_SIM?
>
> Kernels for the HP simulator (ski) use a SCSI model, not IDE,
> so they should be OK.
>
> The SGI simulator *does* use IDE, and this will break that. But
> my friends at SGI are looking at exposing the simulated IDE device
> via PCI, which should fix it.
OK
> > * removing IDE_ARCH_OBSOLETE_INIT define has some implications,
> > * non-functional ide-cs driver (but there is no PCMCIA on IA64?)
>
> PCMCIA might be of theoretical interest, but not important enough
> by itself to keep IDE_ARCH_OBSOLETE_INIT, IMHO. And it sounds like
> ide-cs can be fixed fairly easily to not depend on it.
Yes, ide-cs needs fixing anyway.
> > * ordering change for ide-pnp interfaces in case of no IDE devices
> > on default IDE PCI ports, (but there aren't any ide-pnp devices on IA64?)
>
> I'm not aware of any ide-pnp devices on IA64, so I don't think this
> is a problem for us. The SGI simulator could use ide-pnp via
> PNPACPI, but ordering shouldn't be a problem there.
OK
> But it is interesting that PNP IDE devices are discovered *after*
> PCI devices. For serial, we do PNP before PCI, on the theory that
> PNP devices are usually built-in and shouldn't move if you just plug
> in a new PCI card.
>
> > * non-functional HDIO_REGISTER_HWIF ioctl (ain't really working either)
>
> HDIO_SCAN_HWIF - I don't know about this one. How are we supposed to
> follow the "new ports shouldn't define IDE_ARCH_OBSOLETE_INIT" injunction
> if we lose all this functionality without it? ia64 is about as close to
> a new port as you get :-)
* new legacy style interfaces cannot be registered from user-space
(but they still can be using kernel parameter)
* non-working coldplug support
(I'm working on sysfs interface for that)
> > This changes default default MAX_HWIFS value from
> > 10 (6 in case of !CONFIG_PCI) to 4 which is not desirable.
> >
> > IMO the best thing for now is to leave MAX_HWIFS alone.
>
> IDE on ia64 is little-used, so I'm OK with leaving it alone, but
> I do think it's wrong for an architecture with no real restriction
> to specify MAX_HWIFS in ide.h. Better to have the config option,
> and make the default there larger if necessary.
>
> > > I noticed that on a box with no devices on ide1, we probed
> > > ide1 twice -- once via ide_setup_pci_device() and again via
> > > ide_generic_init(). This isn't fatal, since the generic probe
> > > uses the I/O ports setup by PCI IDE, but it's unnecessary
> > > and a bit ugly.
> > >
> > > I stuck in a "hwif->noprobe = 1" at the point where probe_hwif()
> > > decides the interface isn't present, which prevents the second
> > > probe by ide_generic_init().
> >
> > Please separate this change out - it is a nice fix but it affects other
> > archs/drivers and somebody needs to audit all IDE host drivers that
> > they set hwif->noprobe = 0 correctly before probing in case of re-using
> > hwif that was already owned/probed by other driver.
>
> OK, I'll split this and look into it a bit more.
Thanks.
> > Please make IDE_GENERIC depend on !IA_64.
>
> Huh? The first patch I posted did exactly that, nothing more. But
> Alan pointed out that I should instead clean up asm-ia64/ide.h, which
> I think leads to a nicer solution.
Both changes are nice :-)
Thanks,
Bartlomiej
-
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]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
|
|