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

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
From: James Bottomley
Date: Sunday, August 3, 2008 - 12:21 pm

On Sun, 2008-08-03 at 19:45 +0100, Alan Cox wrote:

I'd be a bit surprised if that's anything other than a niche.  PIO is
deadly slow and wasteful of precious CPU cycles ... and embedded devices
seem to be interested in performance as well (which the DMA modes
bring).


My observation was merely that I hadn't seen it discussed.


Hey, I'd be the last person to discourage anyone from maintaining
obsolete systems ... however, the outside world looking in on this is
interested to know where they should be starting if they have some type
of CF/IDE device to support.  What we really want to avoid is someone
spending months on a device driver only to have us turn around and
deprecate the subsystem.

I don't envisage anything in terms of code changes (or removal) coming
out of this.  What I would like is a nice roadmap of where to start for
people contemplating writing IDE drivers.

James


--
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 ..., James Bottomley, (Sun Aug 3, 12:21 pm)
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)