Re: [PATCH] pdc20265 problem.

From: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz (
Date: Fri Aug 02 2002 - 14:05:24 EST

> Just FYI,
> before these "#ifdef" fixes it was treated as OFF_BOARD unless
> CONFIG_PDC202XX_FORCE is set. (now it's inverted)

This should be fixed.

> And my point is that it does not matter how physically this controller
> installed - onboard or offboard. Idea is that we should have control

It is not on/offboard case. It is primary/secondary boot device case.

> which controller should be treated as "primary" (ide0/1) and which as
> "secondary" (ide2/3). I don't see/know how we can do it unless we mark
> one of controllers ON_BOARD and another OFF_BOARD and play with


> And also I don't believe that this is good idea to treat one of Promises
> so differently.

Once again - on some machines it is primary IDE (booting one), so we have
to give user possibility for 'onboarding' it. However it should depend on
CONFIG_PDC202XX_FORCE... hmm... but on others it is offboard so distro
compiled kernels might have problem here :\.



- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to More majordomo info at Please read the FAQ at

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Aug 07 2002 - 22:00:20 EST