[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4A88014D.9060309@garzik.org>
Date: Sun, 16 Aug 2009 08:53:33 -0400
From: Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>
To: "Subbrathnam, Swaminathan" <swami.iyer@...com>
CC: Sergei Shtylyov <sshtylyov@...mvista.com>,
"linux-ide@...r.kernel.org" <linux-ide@...r.kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: sata AHCI controller over non-PCI bus
Subbrathnam, Swaminathan wrote:
> Jeff,
> From the below link (from Sergei) it seems that you have already re-factored the AHCI implementation dependency on PCI. I would like to add support for the OMAPL138 SATA on top of your changes. That would be the ideal way forward for me.
>
> Have the ahci re-factoring changes queued for mainline merge already? I just joined the list and hence do not know the status.
>
> Sergei,
> Appreciate the response.
I store the refactoring in git, on the "libahci" branch of
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/jgarzik/libata-dev.git
Unfortunately, I am having second thoughts about an element of the
current design. With current Linux distributions, they do not appear to
deal well with the multi-module dependency libata -> libahci -> ahci.
If I had to guess, I would say that mkinitrd creation tools only look at
one tree level's worth of kernel module dependencies.
Thus, ahci would wind up -not- in initrd, in a libahci solution.
I am thinking that I will just add Marvell and ATP support to ahci.c,
and let someone else deal with libahci separation -- which is still needed.
At this point, I would rather get Marvell/ATP support into users' hands,
rather than wait for distros to catch up to modern technology.
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