Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1161572AbWI2RDv (ORCPT ); Fri, 29 Sep 2006 13:03:51 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1161759AbWI2RDs (ORCPT ); Fri, 29 Sep 2006 13:03:48 -0400 Received: from xenotime.net ([66.160.160.81]:43951 "HELO xenotime.net") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1161753AbWI2RDq (ORCPT ); Fri, 29 Sep 2006 13:03:46 -0400 Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2006 10:04:57 -0700 From: Randy Dunlap To: Kristen Carlson Accardi Cc: Matthew Garrett , linux-ide@vger.intel.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, jgarzik@pobox.com Subject: Re: [patch 1/2] libata: _GTF support Message-Id: <20060929100457.eaf0425e.rdunlap@xenotime.net> In-Reply-To: <20060929095409.3656d7a9.kristen.c.accardi@intel.com> References: <20060928182211.076258000@localhost.localdomain> <20060928112901.62ee8eba.kristen.c.accardi@intel.com> <20060929020707.GA22082@srcf.ucam.org> <20060929095409.3656d7a9.kristen.c.accardi@intel.com> Organization: YPO4 X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 2.2.9 (GTK+ 2.8.10; x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1968 Lines: 45 On Fri, 29 Sep 2006 09:54:09 -0700 Kristen Carlson Accardi wrote: > On Fri, 29 Sep 2006 03:07:07 +0100 > Matthew Garrett wrote: > > > On Thu, Sep 28, 2006 at 11:29:01AM -0700, Kristen Carlson Accardi wrote: > > > > I mentioned this to Randy a while back, but I can't remember what sort > > of resolution we came to. In any case: > > > > > + * sata_get_dev_handle - finds acpi_handle and PCI device.function > > > > I'm a bit uncomfortable that we seem to have two quite different ways of > > accomplishing much the same thing. On the PCI bus, we have a callback > > that gets triggered whenever a new PCI device is attached. At that > > point, we look for the associated ACPI object and put a pointer to that > > in the device structure. Then, whenever we want to make an ACPI call, we > > can simply refer to that. > > > > This implementation seems to reimplement much of the same lookup code, > > but makes it libata specific. Wouldn't it be cleaner to implement it in > > a similar way to PCI? The only real downside is that you need to add a > > callback in the ata bus code. drivers/pci/pci-acpi.c/pci_acpi_init is > > the sort of thing required. > > > > (Thinking ahead, would that make it easier to maintain links in sysfs > > between devices and acpi objects?) > > > > -- > > Matthew Garrett | mjg59@srcf.ucam.org > > This makes sense to me. I'm happy to put together some patches for > commenting on if people think this is a good way to go. It would be > much cleaner in my opinion and we could get rid of a good chunk of code. My belated memory of it is that I tried Matthew's suggestion and it didn't work, but I have confidence in Kristen. Go for it. --- ~Randy - 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/