[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <48C41A2E.8040907@ru.mvista.com>
Date: Sun, 07 Sep 2008 22:15:10 +0400
From: Sergei Shtylyov <sshtylyov@...mvista.com>
To: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <bzolnier@...il.com>
Cc: linux-ide@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/18] ide: add ->read_sff_dma_status method
Hello.
Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
>>> static void ide_tf_load(ide_drive_t *drive, ide_task_t *task)
>>> {
>>> ide_hwif_t *hwif = drive->hwif;
>>>@@ -323,6 +331,8 @@ static void ata_output_data(ide_drive_t
>>>
>>> void default_hwif_transport(ide_hwif_t *hwif)
>>> {
>>>+ hwif->read_sff_dma_status = ide_read_sff_dma_status;
>>>+
>>> hwif->tf_load = ide_tf_load;
>>> hwif->tf_read = ide_tf_read;
>>
>> I also didn't understand the motivation behind putting this method
>>together with the transport operations... IMO, DMA programming interface
>>hardly has anything to do with transporting the data over IDE bus.
> The motivation was that hwif->dma_ops is not available yet when
> ->read_sff_dma_status is used in ide_pci_check_simplex().
> However I agree that it should somehow find its way into ->dma_ops
> (as usual patches are stongly preffered :).
Unless I'm missing something changing the place where hwif->dma_ops is
initialized to sff_dma_ops (along the lines it was changed for hwif->dma_base)
seems pretty trivial, so I wonder why you didn't do it in the same patch...
Hm, I guess I'm seeing a real issue with this patch...
> Thanks,
> Bart
MBR, Sergei
--
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