Re: [PATCH 1/3] PATA host controller driver for ep93xx

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Monday 02 April 2012, Rafal Prylowski wrote:
> I think that inheriting from .ata_bmdma_port_ops is quite reasonable.
> Another option would be to inherit from .ata_sff_port_ops and implement
> .qc_issue hook (like in pata_octeon_cf.c), but this way we end up
> reimplementing the same things from libata-sff.c, IMHO. Also, I think
> that it's not possible to write PATA driver without this SFF stuff
> (at least for me - I'm not libata expert).
> I reviewed code paths from all hooks used in ep93xx driver to make sure
> that we use only ep93xx_pata_read/ep93xx_pata_write instead of ioread/iowrite.
> 
Ok, thanks for the confirmation.

	Arnd


_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel


[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux ARM (vger)]     [Linux ARM MSM]     [Linux Omap]     [CentOS ARM]     [Linux Arm]     [Linux Tegra]     [Fedora ARM]     [Linux for Samsung SOC]     [eCos]     [Linux Fastboot]     [Gcc Help]     [Git]     [DCCP]     [IETF Announce]     [Security]     [Linux MIPS]

  Powered by Linux