[lkml]   [2000]   [Aug]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH] Re: Move of input drivers, some word needed from you
On Wed, 23 Aug 2000, Rogier Wolff wrote:

> Similarly, I don't think we should have a quantum.c to talk to Quantum
> drives. Talking to quantum drives is similar enough to talking to
> maxtor drives that one driver should be able to handle it.

Unless you are asking about uniqueness in feature design.

> So, it's all a question of degree.
> I think that we need to share more code in the serial driver. Have a
> clean interface that reduces most serial drivers by 2000 lines-of-code
> or so. Are we at 1 bug per 600 LOC yet? That's three less bugs.
> I agree, maybe we should rethink the IDE driver. But NCR53c875 and

Yes/No just allow for correctness to data-phase and setups to allow
command completion by default and allow ways to handle exceptions if it is
known how to, also provide the needed override-jerk code for people with

> SYM53C895 are close enough to be handled by one driver. So it's a
> matter of degree.

Andre Hedrick
The Linux ATA/IDE guy

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 12:38    [W:0.273 / U:0.580 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site