linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] [IDE] Platform IDE driver (was: MMIO IDE driver)

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20070725213925.2f25906c@the-village.bc.nu>
Date:	Wed, 25 Jul 2007 21:39:25 +0100
From:	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
To:	Guennadi Liakhovetski <g.liakhovetski@....de>
Cc:	Vitaly Bordug <vitb@...nel.crashing.org>,
	linux-ide@...r.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@...abs.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] [IDE] Platform IDE driver (was: MMIO IDE driver)

> driver to using platform-device. I got a reply, that it's not worth it now 
> that IDE is slowly becoming obsolete, and the pata_platform serves the 
> perpose perfectly well. I found this argument reasonable, I had the same 
> doubt, just wanted to double-check. So, why do we now need a new legacy 
> (a/drivers/ide/legacy/ide_platform.c) driver when a "modern" driver 
> exists?


We don't *need* it but some people still want to use old IDE and the
author was willing to make it neatly compatible so that anything that
works with the pata_platform should be able to use the ide_platform
driver and vice versa. For the shorter term that can only be a good thing
- arch code doesn't need to care about which driver is used, end users
can pick and it doesn't end up adding new ties between code and old IDE.

-
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/