Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 2 Aug 2002 21:05:24 +0200 (MET DST) | From | Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] pdc20265 problem. |
| |
> Just FYI, > > before these "#ifdef" fixes it was treated as OFF_BOARD unless > CONFIG_PDC202XX_FORCE is set. (now it's inverted)
This should be fixed.
> > And my point is that it does not matter how physically this controller > installed - onboard or offboard. Idea is that we should have control
It is not on/offboard case. It is primary/secondary boot device case.
> which controller should be treated as "primary" (ide0/1) and which as > "secondary" (ide2/3). I don't see/know how we can do it unless we mark > one of controllers ON_BOARD and another OFF_BOARD and play with > CONFIG_BLK_DEV_OFFBOARD.
Yes.
> And also I don't believe that this is good idea to treat one of Promises > so differently.
Once again - on some machines it is primary IDE (booting one), so we have to give user possibility for 'onboarding' it. However it should depend on CONFIG_PDC202XX_FORCE... hmm... but on others it is offboard so distro compiled kernels might have problem here :\.
Regards -- Bartlomiej
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |