Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Wed, 24 Jul 2002 12:53:01 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Wed, 24 Jul 2002 12:53:01 -0400 Received: from dsl-213-023-022-208.arcor-ip.net ([213.23.22.208]:63431 "EHLO starship") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Wed, 24 Jul 2002 12:52:59 -0400 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII From: Daniel Phillips To: Jens Axboe Subject: Re: DAC960 Bitrot Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2002 18:57:51 +0200 X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.3.2] Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References:

<20020724143931.GG5159@suse.de> In-Reply-To: <20020724143931.GG5159@suse.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Message-Id: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1819 Lines: 39 On Wednesday 24 July 2002 16:39, Jens Axboe wrote: > The only changes I did to this driver where trivial conversions in the > 2.5.1-pre days, in fact even before multi-page bio's existed. This, > btw, is also something you should keep an eye out for -- multi-page bio > support is currently broken. I spotted that. I changed bio_size (which is gone) to bio_sectors(bio) << 9, is this correct? > I would suggest also moving DAC960 to the > pci dma api (this is a must) and then move it to use the generic block > helpers for mapping requests. That way there isn't a lot of nasty > duplication there as well, plus it will automatically get the multi-page > issues right. My first concern is to get something working any way I can so that I can start doing regression testing. True/false: the bad old way of doing dma will still work, it's just deprecated? If true, then I should (trivially) switch back to the old way of doing things, get the rest working, then convert to the dma api. Maybe *you* could make all the changes at the same time and expect to end up with something that works, but I can't. The alternative is to go back many kernel versions and find the first one that broke something, but I don't want to do that because too much else was broken at the time. > Hmm, is DAC960 using a full major per controller?! As you saw, it implements the top level block interface instead of being a scsi device as it should be. So for disk subsystems we have: 1) IDE 2) SCSI 3) DAC960. Eep. At some point it's all going to be SCSI, right? -- Daniel - 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/