Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 24 Apr 2008 08:50:16 -0400 | From | Mark Lord <> | Subject | Re: [2.6 patch] select ATA_SFF |
| |
Sergei Shtylyov wrote: > Alan Cox wrote: > >>> Sergei Shtylyov wrote: > >>>>>> Jeff, Tejun, what "sff" in the file name actually means? Isn't >>>>>> it strange that the drivers lacking DMA support or not really >>>>>> compliant with SFF-8038i have to link with this file? > >>>>> Maybe it should be libata-tf and libata-bmdma, but sff (sans bmdma) >>>>> and bmdma is acceptable, hopefully, right? > >>>> What's sff sans bmdma? > >>> Supposed to be TF interface. IIRC, the SFF term was first from Alan >>> although it's entirely possible that I misunderstood it and used it >>> in the wrong way. Alan, can you please clear up the confusion? > >> The SFF/Intel spec is for PCI IDE (BMDMA or otherwise), so it covers and >> defines all the common bits of the IDE interface on PCI (and in defining >> the legacy interface conveniently documents the extended ST-412 interface >> used by ATA and "pre-ATA" IDE/EIDE controllers). > > If you mean SFF-8038i (which can indeed be named "SFF/Intel"), it > documents *only* BMDMA. If you mean something else, please be more > precise. ..
The "Intel PCI IDE Controller Specification Revision 1.0 3/4/94" doesn't mention bmdma at all, but does document the taskfile register addresses. It defers to ATA-1 for actual taskfile descriptions/functionality, though.
There's nothing particularly bad about the current naming we use, though.
Cheers
| |