Re: [PATCH 2.6.13] libata: use common pci remove in ahci

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

 



Brett Russ wrote:
Jeff,

This looked prime to cut since ahci_remove_one() was a functionally
identical to ata_pci_remove_one() except for the interrupt disable
(have_msi) bits, which fit nicely into ahci_host_stop().  However,

1) Will it work?

2) Isn't it wrong for the IRQ disable at the chip to occur *after*
free_irq() is called to disconnect the handler (independent of
question 1...since this is the case currently)?  Granted, all of the
ports have gone through scsi_remove_host() but theoretically there
still is a possibility the chip could interrupt.

If I'm wrong on both counts I'll blame it on need for sleep... :-)


Moving AHCI away from ata_pci_remove_one() was actually intentional. This gives the driver a bit more freedom: legacy region handling and ->host_stop() became unnecessary. Also, I was concerned that ata_pci_remove_one() might grow into a one-size-fits-all unmaintainable behemoth.

Short term, if one were being obsessive, a potential cleanup could be to make common the two loops in ahci_remove_one()/ata_pci_remove_one().

Long term, libata driver API should become more like the register_foo()/unregister_foo() interfaces you see elsewhere in the kernel. That direction has the potential to shake up the current code path through ata_pci_remove_one().

So... your patch, while technically correct, is going in the opposite direction to where I want to go :)

	Jeff


-
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]
  Powered by Linux