|To:||David Daney <email@example.com>|
|Subject:||Re: [PATCH] New IDE/block driver for OCTEON SOC Compact Flash interface.|
|From:||Sergei Shtylyov <firstname.lastname@example.org>|
|Date:||Fri, 14 Nov 2008 03:05:10 +0300|
|Cc:||email@example.com, linux-mips <firstname.lastname@example.org>|
|User-agent:||Thunderbird 188.8.131.52 (Windows/20080914)|
Hello. David Daney wrote:
As part of our efforts to get the Cavium OCTEON processor support merged (see: http://marc.info/?l=linux-mips&m=122600487218824), we have this CF driver for your consideration. Most OCTEON variants have *no* DMA or interrupt support on the CF interface so a simple bit-banging approach is taken. Although if DMA is available, we do take advantage of it. The register definitions are part of the chip support patch set mentioned above, and are not included here. At this point I would like to get feedback as to whether this is a good approach for the CF driver, or perhaps generate ideas about other possible approaches.
It's totally unacceptable for drivers/ide/ as this is self-containeed driver no using IDE core for anything, so this can only fit well to drivers/block/. OTOH, CF support via self-contained driver is certainly a waste of code since IDE core and (libata) are here to drive the CF devices as well. What we need is a "normal" IDE or libata (at your option) driver.
|<Prev in Thread]||Current Thread||[Next in Thread>|
|Previous by Date:||Re: [PATCH]: R10000 Needs LL/SC Workaround in Gcc, Richard Sandiford|
|Next by Date:||Re: [PATCH] New IDE/block driver for OCTEON SOC Compact Flash interface., Sergei Shtylyov|
|Previous by Thread:||[PATCH] New IDE/block driver for OCTEON SOC Compact Flash interface., David Daney|
|Next by Thread:||Re: [PATCH] New IDE/block driver for OCTEON SOC Compact Flash interface., Sergei Shtylyov|
|Indexes:||[Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists]|