Re: [PATCH 4/5] pata: Update experimental tags
From: Sergei Shtylyov
Date: Wed Nov 18 2009 - 13:46:55 EST
Hello.
Alan Cox wrote:
>>Having separate drivers wasn't the best decisions from the maintainability
point-of-view. It added needless complexity (different chips share the same
It was most definitely a good decision, having maintained both sets of
Separating HPT36x was grounded enough decision but I can't say the same
of the separation of HPT3xxN.
drivers at different times. It also makes it possible to do things the
way highpoint does
Oh, don't remind me of that stupid code mostly not worth copying from...
PCI IDs which make detection across multiple drivers extremely painful) and
confusion (i.e. would you have guessed that HPT302 is supported by pata_hpt37x
while HPT302N by pata_hpt3x2n?).
How about HPT371N? ;-)
WBR, Sergei
--
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/