Re: Kernel Summit request for Discussion of future of ATA (libata) and IDE

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
From: Alan Cox
Date: Sunday, August 3, 2008 - 11:45 am

> > There is a trend in new hardware to interfaces that simply won't fit old

It isn't that simple. The newer PATA controllers are diverging from the
old style interfaces as well.


The simpler embedded wants a pure CF driver - no scsi, no libata, no
drivers/ide overhead, just about 4K of CF only pio driver.


We've certainly discussed it in the past and I'm not sure its gotten that
personal - many people contribute to both trees for example, or are
directly cc'ing stuff between trees to ensure they stay in sync and any
useful info gets in both.

Anyway with my libata hat on I would say its far too early to worry about
this. Right now we have platforms that need old IDE and it is still
proving very useful to be able to ask people to try both. I don't quite
know why Bart is putting so much effort into polishing up the old IDE but
if he's enjoying it I don't really care 8)

Alan
--
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
Re: Kernel Summit request for Discussion of future of ATA ..., Rafael J. Wysocki, (Sun Aug 3, 10:45 am)
Re: Kernel Summit request for Discussion of future of ATA ..., Alan Cox, (Sun Aug 3, 11:45 am)
Re: Kernel Summit request for Discussion of future of ATA ..., Bartlomiej Zolnierki ..., (Sun Aug 3, 1:09 pm)
Re: Kernel Summit request for Discussion of future of ATA ..., Bartlomiej Zolnierki ..., (Sun Aug 3, 1:19 pm)
Re: Kernel Summit request for Discussion of future of ATA ..., Benjamin Herrenschmidt, (Sun Aug 3, 10:35 pm)