Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Sun, 27 Aug 2000 02:42:08 -0700 (PDT) | From | Andre Hedrick <> | Subject | Re: [patch] vt82cxxx.c v1.9 - Re: UDMA trouble in VT82C586 IDE |
| |
Since you did not hesitate this time as the first time I asked the question, DO IT! Vojtech, this time I trust that you did it right! Good Job!
LT add and see how it goes as a direct replacement.
Cheers,
On Sun, 27 Aug 2000, Vojtech Pavlik wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 26, 2000 at 11:19:43PM -0700, Andre Hedrick wrote: > > > All Vojtech has to do is accept responsiblity for the chipset code. > > Now, after the last MWDMA timing issue was resolved, I can do that. Yes, > while I can't say my code is 100% perfect, because I'd have to verify > that with an IDE analyzer which unfortunately I don't have access to, > after some time of extensive testing there are no more failure cases on > all the machines it was tested on. (One case is still unclear, but that > user is now using 2.2 and couldn't do more testing.) > > If yoy need it said explicitely - yes, now I can stand behind that code > and I do accept the responsibility for it if it breaks anywhere. (Of > course the legal no-warranty statement still applies). > > > I mean all flavors of the bastardization of the design. > > This includes the ones that you can change the chipset reporting type if > > you know the dirty-secrets. The problem is that some mainboard > > manufacturers alter the PCI ID codes to fake compatablity. > > This should not a problem, anymore and at least for the MVP3 northbridge > this was solved by a routine in the PCI quirk code that switches off the > false ID reporting feature in it. > > If you know of any other VIA chip besides MVP3, please tell me, and > we'll add it to the list. > > Anyway, the new VIA code (unlike the old one) doesn't need to know the > northbridge type, caring only about the southbridges, thus even this ugly > trick shouldn't cause any trouble to it. > > > Now if your board is one of these boards, then I would expect it to not > > work. > > > > On Sat, 26 Aug 2000, Cesar Eduardo Barros wrote: > > > > > > > > It works great now. I got a month-old full rewrite of via82cxxx.c from > > > Vojtech Pavlik in the lkml archives and compiled it. > > > > > > Linus: I think it should be included. The old driver is messy, hairy, and fails > > > to work here. The new one is clean, neat, and works fine. If you lost the > > > > Just because you have a newer wierder combination does not mean the old > > and lousy is junk. > > Honestly, do you believe the original via82cxxx.c was a nice and clean > approach to the problem? > > I can't say my rewrite is very nice yet, either, because the IDE API > limits the cleanliness of design of it a lot. > > > Again, if Vojtech will put it on the line that compatablity/support is > > better go for it. > > It is. > > > In the past Vojtech was not ready to jump on this and > > run. I have one, and only one, completely corrupted drive, beyond > > recovery by any means, because of one incomplete thought in the design. > > > > I will not accept this happenning again. > > Here goes a patch for 2.4.0-test7. [ 883 lines removed, 387 added ] > > Andre: Please approve it, you're the IDE maintainer. > > Linus: Please apply it if Andre approves it. > > Thanks. > > -- > Vojtech Pavlik > SuSE Labs >
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/
|  |