Re: Merging libata PATA support into the base kernel

Matthieu CASTET wrote:

On Fri, 11 Aug 2006 11:47:07 -0400, Mark Lord wrote:

And libata already has sufficient ioctl compatibility for nearly all
purposes with the old drivers/ide stuff.  Yes, there are some more
esoteric ioctls that I once implemented in drivers/ide that do not
exist for libata, and nobody will miss them.

IRRC, there nothing for ATAPI ioctl compatibility, there only things for
ATA.

What _specifically_ is missing, in your opinion?

	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/

---

• References:
  • Merging libata PATA support into the base kernel
    • From: Alan Cox <[email protected]>
  • Re: Merging libata PATA support into the base kernel
    • From: Mark Lord <[email protected]>
  • Re: Merging libata PATA support into the base kernel
    • From: Jeff Garzik <[email protected]>
  • Re: Merging libata PATA support into the base kernel
    • From: Mark Lord <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH 1/1] network memory allocator.
• Next by Date: Re: Strange write starvation on 2.6.17 (and other) kernels
• Previous by thread: Re: Merging libata PATA support into the base kernel
• Next by thread: /dev/sd*
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[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]