Since you did not hesitate this time as the first time I asked the
question, DO IT! Vojtech, this time I trust that you did it right!
Good Job!
LT add and see how it goes as a direct replacement.
Cheers,
On Sun, 27 Aug 2000, Vojtech Pavlik wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 26, 2000 at 11:19:43PM -0700, Andre Hedrick wrote:
>
> > All Vojtech has to do is accept responsiblity for the chipset code.
>
> Now, after the last MWDMA timing issue was resolved, I can do that. Yes,
> while I can't say my code is 100% perfect, because I'd have to verify
> that with an IDE analyzer which unfortunately I don't have access to,
> after some time of extensive testing there are no more failure cases on
> all the machines it was tested on. (One case is still unclear, but that
> user is now using 2.2 and couldn't do more testing.)
>
> If yoy need it said explicitely - yes, now I can stand behind that code
> and I do accept the responsibility for it if it breaks anywhere. (Of
> course the legal no-warranty statement still applies).
>
> > I mean all flavors of the bastardization of the design.
> > This includes the ones that you can change the chipset reporting type if
> > you know the dirty-secrets. The problem is that some mainboard
> > manufacturers alter the PCI ID codes to fake compatablity.
>
> This should not a problem, anymore and at least for the MVP3 northbridge
> this was solved by a routine in the PCI quirk code that switches off the
> false ID reporting feature in it.
>
> If you know of any other VIA chip besides MVP3, please tell me, and
> we'll add it to the list.
>
> Anyway, the new VIA code (unlike the old one) doesn't need to know the
> northbridge type, caring only about the southbridges, thus even this ugly
> trick shouldn't cause any trouble to it.
>
> > Now if your board is one of these boards, then I would expect it to not
> > work.
> >
> > On Sat, 26 Aug 2000, Cesar Eduardo Barros wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > It works great now. I got a month-old full rewrite of via82cxxx.c from
> > > Vojtech Pavlik in the lkml archives and compiled it.
> > >
> > > Linus: I think it should be included. The old driver is messy, hairy, and fails
> > > to work here. The new one is clean, neat, and works fine. If you lost the
> >
> > Just because you have a newer wierder combination does not mean the old
> > and lousy is junk.
>
> Honestly, do you believe the original via82cxxx.c was a nice and clean
> approach to the problem?
>
> I can't say my rewrite is very nice yet, either, because the IDE API
> limits the cleanliness of design of it a lot.
>
> > Again, if Vojtech will put it on the line that compatablity/support is
> > better go for it.
>
> It is.
>
> > In the past Vojtech was not ready to jump on this and
> > run. I have one, and only one, completely corrupted drive, beyond
> > recovery by any means, because of one incomplete thought in the design.
> >
> > I will not accept this happenning again.
>
> Here goes a patch for 2.4.0-test7. [ 883 lines removed, 387 added ]
>
> Andre: Please approve it, you're the IDE maintainer.
>
> Linus: Please apply it if Andre approves it.
>
> Thanks.
>
> --
> Vojtech Pavlik
> SuSE Labs
>
Andre Hedrick
The Linux ATA/IDE guy
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Aug 31 2000 - 21:00:18 EST