Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 18 Nov 2009 21:47:25 +0300 | From | Sergei Shtylyov <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 4/5] pata: Update experimental tags |
| |
Hello.
Alan Cox wrote:
>>Having separate drivers wasn't the best decisions from the maintainability >>point-of-view. It added needless complexity (different chips share the same
> It was most definitely a good decision, having maintained both sets of
Separating HPT36x was grounded enough decision but I can't say the same of the separation of HPT3xxN.
> drivers at different times. It also makes it possible to do things the > way highpoint does
Oh, don't remind me of that stupid code mostly not worth copying from...
>>PCI IDs which make detection across multiple drivers extremely painful) and >>confusion (i.e. would you have guessed that HPT302 is supported by pata_hpt37x >>while HPT302N by pata_hpt3x2n?).
How about HPT371N? ;-)
WBR, Sergei
| |