Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 10 Jul 2007 13:42:16 -0400 | From | Jeff Garzik <> | Subject | ata and netdev (was Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.23) |
| |
(just to provide my indicator of status)
Andrew Morton wrote: > libata-config_pm=n-compile-fix.patch
that's for a branch that you don't get via libata-dev#ALL, #mv-ahci-pata.
> pata_acpi-restore-driver.patch
see Alan's comments. I've been ignoring pata_acpi for a while, because IMO it always needed work.
> libata-core-convert-to-use-cancel_rearming_delayed_work.patch
will merge
> libata-implement-ata_wait_after_reset.patch
I'm pretty much this is obsolete. Tejun?
> sata_promise-sata-hotplug-support.patch
will merge
> libata-add-irq_flags-to-struct-pata_platform_info-fix.patch
are other pata_platform people happy with this? I don't know embedded well enough to know if adding this struct member will break things.
> ata-add-the-sw-ncq-support-to-sata_nv-for-mcp51-mcp55-mcp61.patch > sata_nv-allow-changing-queue-depth.patch
should be combined, really. will merge eventually. basic concept OK, but need to review in depth.
> pata_hpt3x3-major-reworking-and-testing.patch > iomap-sort-out-the-broken-address-reporting-caused-by-the-iomap-layer.patch > ata-use-iomap_name.patch
generally OK
> libata-check-for-an-support.patch > scsi-expose-an-to-user-space.patch > libata-expose-an-to-user-space.patch > scsi-save-disk-in-scsi_device.patch > libata-send-event-when-an-received.patch > > Am sitting on these due to confusion regarding the status of the ata-ahci > patches.
I will apply what I can, but it seems there are lifetime problems
> ata-ahci-alpm-store-interrupt-value.patch > ata-ahci-alpm-expose-power-management-policy-option-to-users.patch > ata-ahci-alpm-enable-link-power-management-for-ata-drivers.patch > ata-ahci-alpm-enable-aggressive-link-power-management-for-ahci-controllers.patch > > These appear to need some work.
seemed mostly OK to me. what comments did I miss?
> libata-add-human-readable-error-value-decoding.patch
still pondering; in my mbox queue
> libata-fix-hopefully-all-the-remaining-problems-with.patch > testing-patch-for-ali-pata-fixes-hopefully-for-the-problems-with-atapi-dma.patch > pata_ali-more-work.patch
No idea. I would poke Alan. Probably drop.
> 8139too-force-media-setting-fix.patch > blackfin-on-chip-ethernet-mac-controller-driver.patch > atari_pamsnetc-old-declaration-ritchie-style-fix.patch > sundance-phy-address-form-0-only-for-device-id-0x0200.patch
Needs a bug fix, so that the newly modified loop doesn't scan the final phy id, then loop back around to scan the first again.
> 3x59x-fix-pci-resource-management.patch > update-smc91x-driver-with-arm-versatile-board-info.patch > drivers-net-ns83820c-add-paramter-to-disable-auto.patch > > netdev patches which are stuck in limbo land.
? I don't think I've seen these.
> bonding-bond_mainc-make-2-functions-static.patch
FWIW bonding stuff should go to me, since it lives mostly in drivers/net
> x86-initial-fixmap-support.patch
Andi material?
> mm-revert-kernel_ds-buffered-write-optimisation.patch > revert-81b0c8713385ce1b1b9058e916edcf9561ad76d6.patch > revert-6527c2bdf1f833cc18e8f42bd97973d583e4aa83.patch > mm-clean-up-buffered-write-code.patch > mm-debug-write-deadlocks.patch > mm-trim-more-holes.patch > mm-buffered-write-cleanup.patch > mm-write-iovec-cleanup.patch > mm-fix-pagecache-write-deadlocks.patch > mm-buffered-write-iterator.patch > fs-fix-data-loss-on-error.patch > mm-restore-kernel_ds-optimisations.patch > pagefault-in-write deadlock fixes. Will hold for 2.6.24.
Any of the above worth 2.6.23? Just wondering if they were useful cleanups / minor fixes prior to new aops patches?
> more-scheduled-oss-driver-removal.patch
ACK
> oss-trident-massive-whitespace-removal.patch > oss-trident-fix-locking-around-write_voice_regs.patch > oss-trident-replace-deprecated-pci_find_device-with-pci_get_device.patch > remove-options-depending-on-oss_obsolete.patch > > Merge
what about just removing the OSS drivers in question? :)
> intel-iommu-dmar-detection-and-parsing-logic.patch > intel-iommu-pci-generic-helper-function.patch > intel-iommu-clflush_cache_range-now-takes-size-param.patch > intel-iommu-iova-allocation-and-management-routines.patch > intel-iommu-intel-iommu-driver.patch > intel-iommu-avoid-memory-allocation-failures-in-dma-map-api-calls.patch > intel-iommu-intel-iommu-cmdline-option-forcedac.patch > intel-iommu-dmar-fault-handling-support.patch > intel-iommu-iommu-gfx-workaround.patch > intel-iommu-iommu-floppy-workaround.patch > > Don't know. I don't think there were any great objections, but I don't > think much benefit has been demonstrated?
Just the general march of progress on new hardware :)
I would like to see this support merged in /some/ form. We've been telling Intel for years they were sillyheads for not bothering with an IOMMU. Now that they have, we should give them a cookie and support good technology.
Jeff
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |