Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1759557AbYHCUJg (ORCPT ); Sun, 3 Aug 2008 16:09:36 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754608AbYHCUJ2 (ORCPT ); Sun, 3 Aug 2008 16:09:28 -0400 Received: from fg-out-1718.google.com ([72.14.220.156]:36863 "EHLO fg-out-1718.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753754AbYHCUJ1 (ORCPT ); Sun, 3 Aug 2008 16:09:27 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition :references; b=lMR8FwNyhbizHzW6j5tAhPOUfx+2ohu8zKq4+NAq64elWbqUfuCQDQXiO6eSiXt4Xz t78lOFREwKM4764M/O6ZHqgLII1bLBXkiDim5njWH509eP48E5is5MVZ/19az0Vpy+EW Iah6bibhjGdOrCABjw6LBo166t71gWgoC2ujw= Message-ID: <58cb370e0808031309n54052c51m744c479aa69b2f4a@mail.gmail.com> Date: Sun, 3 Aug 2008 22:09:25 +0200 From: "Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz" To: "James Bottomley" Subject: Re: Kernel Summit request for Discussion of future of ATA (libata) and IDE Cc: ksummit-2008-discuss@lists.linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel , linux-ide In-Reply-To: <1217779055.4179.10.camel@localhost.localdomain> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <1217779055.4179.10.camel@localhost.localdomain> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2504 Lines: 61 I'm using gmail's interface (I don't have access to my laptop ATM) so the mail may look a bit weird... On Sun, Aug 3, 2008 at 5:57 PM, James Bottomley wrote: > Right at the moment, we have two separate subsystems for running IDE > type devices: driver/ide and drivers/ata. The claim I've seen is that > drivers/ata can do everything drivers/ide can do plus it does sata. I This claim doesn't seem to have confirmation in facts: * There is still hardware that is simply not-supported by libata at all: - architecture specific hardware (ppc, m68k, mips, arm) - "difficult" legacy PC-class hardware (i.e. secondary interface on CY82C693 etc) * There are still regressions in many libata PCI host drivers dating back to their rushed introduction. * There are still corner case in libata core - PIO is dead slow compared to drivers/ide/, "serialized" hosts are not supported, some quirks for obsolete hardware got lost... > also note that no major distribution seems to enable anything in > drivers/ide anymore, so given this is it time to deprecate drivers/ide? Major distributions make their own decisions (I don't remeber anybody from these distros discussing the conversion on linux-kernel or linux-ide) which sometimes don't match with what kernel.org kernels are doing. [ Actually one distro went so far as CONFIG_IDE=n even before support for all PC-class IDE PCI hardware present in drivers/ide was available in libata. ] Also the same major distros that use libata on x86 are using drivers/ide on non-x86. > A counter argument to the above is that not all drivers (particularly > the older ones where hw is scarce) are converted to drivers/ata, so > drivers/ide seems to be needed for some legacy systems (in which case it > can be deprecated but not removed). I've also noted that some embedded > distributions seem to be using drivers/ide, but I'm not really sure > whether this is inertia or some overriding need. drivers/ide deprecation would be a premature thing. > The proposal is to discuss the future of these two subsystems and arrive > at a consensus what's happening to each going forwards. Well, I'm looking forward to discuss the future of Linux ATA support. Thanks, Bart -- 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/