Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH] pdc20265 problem. | From | Alan Cox <> | Date | 03 Aug 2002 14:41:23 +0100 |
| |
On Sat, 2002-08-03 at 02:22, Nick Orlov wrote: > I think that question is _how often_ pdc20265 is used as primary > controller? Actually I know a lot of mobos with pdc20265 as additional > controller (and I don't see the one that uses it as primary). > > Don't forget about "ide=reverse" parameter that allows you to treat > pdc20265 as primary if by default kernel treat pdc20265 as secondary. > > So I don't see _any_ reason to force pdc20265 to be primary (onboard) > unless CONFIG_PDC202XX_FORCE is set.
This is the wrong question.
The right question for a stable kernel is "Why isnt it behaving precisely the same way as it did before the merge". What got confused in the _FORCE stuff. Why did _FORCE checks even get into the raid probe not another config option...
- 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/
| |