Re: [PATCH] pata_acpi: take two

[Robert Hancock]

Alan wrote:
> --- linux.vanilla-2.6.20-rc6-mm3/drivers/ata/pata_amd.c	2007-01-31 14:20:10.000000000 +0000
> +++ linux-2.6.20-rc6-mm3/drivers/ata/pata_amd.c	2007-02-06 17:04:19.000000000 +0000
> @@ -642,6 +642,11 @@
>  	if (type == 1 && rev > 0x7)
>  		type = 2;
>  
> +#if defined(CONFIG_ATA_ACPI)
> +	/* Prefer the ACPI driver for Nvidia hardware */
> +	if (pdev->vendor == PCI_VENDOR_ID_NVIDIA && ata_pata_acpi_present(pdev))
> +		return -ENODEV;
> +#endif		
>  	/* Check for AMD7411 */
>  	if (type == 3)
>  		/* FIFO is broken */

Problem with this approach is it may break distro/initrd setups since 
the pata_amd driver appears to be the one that "should" work based on 
the PCI ID, so the initrd would end up containing only this driver, 
which will fail out with -ENODEV and cause a boot failure. If the root 
filesystem was on a disk driven by this controller, the mkinitrd stuff 
would have to "know" that it should also try loading pata_acpi.

Unless there are some Nvidia boxes out there which don't provide 
_GTM/_STM ACPI methods (which seems a bit unlikely given Allen Martin's 
comments) then we could potentially move the Nvidia PATA PCI IDs into 
the pata_acpi driver, at least if ACPI is enabled in the kernel build..

--
Robert Hancock      Saskatoon, SK, Canada
To email, remove "nospam" from hancockr@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Home Page: http://www.roberthancock.com/

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/