Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Sun, 6 Mar 2022 09:58:25 +0100
From:   Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
To:     Ondrej Zary <linux@zary.sk>
Cc:     Damien Le Moal <damien.lemoal@opensource.wdc.com>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>, Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
        Tim Waugh <tim@cyberelk.net>, linux-block@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-parport@lists.infradead.org, linux-ide@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] pata_parport: paride replacement
Message-ID: <20220306085825.GA22425@lst.de>
References: <20220305201411.501-1-linux@zary.sk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20220305201411.501-1-linux@zary.sk>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01)
Precedence: bulk

Hi Ondrej,

I just took a quick glance and it seems like the actual protocol
modules still are basically almost exactly the same ones as the
paride ones.  Is there a way to just keep the existing modules?

The only big thing I noticed is the host template, but at least
for the transitional periode we could probably allocate that
dynamically in the core.  I think would reduce the amount of code
churn nicely and make review much easier.