[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20070209201807.57e727a4@localhost.localdomain>
Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2007 20:18:07 +0000
From: Alan <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
To: Robert Hancock <hancockr@...w.ca>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, akpm@...l.org, jeff@...zik.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] pata_acpi: take two
> > +#if defined(CONFIG_ATA_ACPI)
> > + /* Prefer the ACPI driver for Nvidia hardware */
> > + if (pdev->vendor == PCI_VENDOR_ID_NVIDIA && ata_pata_acpi_present(pdev))
> > + return -ENODEV;
> > +#endif
> > /* Check for AMD7411 */
> > if (type == 3)
> > /* FIFO is broken */
>
> Problem with this approach is it may break distro/initrd setups since
> the pata_amd driver appears to be the one that "should" work based on
> the PCI ID, so the initrd would end up containing only this driver,
Diddums
> which will fail out with -ENODEV and cause a boot failure. If the root
> filesystem was on a disk driven by this controller, the mkinitrd stuff
> would have to "know" that it should also try loading pata_acpi.
Indeed they will.
> Unless there are some Nvidia boxes out there which don't provide
> _GTM/_STM ACPI methods (which seems a bit unlikely given Allen Martin's
> comments) then we could potentially move the Nvidia PATA PCI IDs into
> the pata_acpi driver, at least if ACPI is enabled in the kernel build..
No we can't. It is a dynamic evaluation. The user may be booting with
acpi=off to work around BIOS problems, so the distribution initrd tools
will just have to learn this out as they do the sata_nv funnies. (Nvidia
is already a special case)
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists