Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 23 Aug 2000 00:31:39 -0700 (PDT) | From | Andre Hedrick <> | Subject | Re: [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 root-hang-overs.
> 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 majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |