[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <48963AE1.8080308@garzik.org>
Date: Sun, 03 Aug 2008 19:10:25 -0400
From: Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>
To: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com>
CC: ksummit-2008-discuss@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-ide <linux-ide@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Kernel Summit request for Discussion of future of ATA (libata)
and IDE
James Bottomley wrote:
> Right at the moment, we have two separate subsystems for running IDE
> type devices: driver/ide and drivers/ata. The claim I've seen is that
> drivers/ata can do everything drivers/ide can do plus it does sata. I
> also note that no major distribution seems to enable anything in
> drivers/ide anymore, so given this is it time to deprecate drivers/ide?
>
> A counter argument to the above is that not all drivers (particularly
> the older ones where hw is scarce) are converted to drivers/ata, so
> drivers/ide seems to be needed for some legacy systems (in which case it
> can be deprecated but not removed). I've also noted that some embedded
> distributions seem to be using drivers/ide, but I'm not really sure
> whether this is inertia or some overriding need.
>
> The proposal is to discuss the future of these two subsystems and arrive
> at a consensus what's happening to each going forwards.
I'm not in any rush to change the status quo as I see it: don't remove
drivers/ide but encourage new drivers to be under libata.
I am a bit disappointed at all the drivers/ide churn. I had hoped it
would sit around and be a stable alternative, a fallback to libata.
Jeff
--
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