Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 30 Jan 2006 16:04:17 +0900 | From | Tejun Heo <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] libata queue updated |
| |
Ingo Oeser wrote: > Hi Jeff, > > > On Saturday 28 January 2006 19:25, Jeff Garzik wrote: >> Testing and merge point in Tejun's flood of patches :) The patch >> below is against current linux-2.6.git. > > These "function(unsigned int *classes)" style functions in > "libata-core.c" worry me somewhat. Esp. that sometimes you have one class, > sometimes two. > This looks like a bug waiting to happen for me. > > Could we somehow get a > > struct ata_classes { > unsigned int master; > unsigned int slave; > } > > here (or similiar), before this is in used everywhere? > > Usage would be function(struct ata_classes *classes) then. >
Hello,
I object. Using array is intentional. Slave aware controllers (PATA / ata_piix) will use [0..1], most SATA controllers will use only [0], and PM aware ones will use [0..15]. The intention was requiring low level drivers of only what they know and normalize them in the core layer.
eg. Current std SATA reset routines consider the argument as *class (a single class value) and it's intentional. As long as a lldd is aware of only one device per port, it's allowed/recommeded to consider the passed classes argument as a pointer to single class value. The rest is upto the core libata layer.
-- tejun - 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/
| |