From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Anton Vorontsov Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 0/12] ahci: Add support for non-PCI devices Date: Wed, 3 Mar 2010 16:15:04 +0300 Message-ID: <20100303131504.GA25973@oksana.dev.rtsoft.ru> References: <20100302182850.GA32057@oksana.dev.rtsoft.ru> <4B8D846F.3080400@garzik.org> Reply-To: avorontsov@ru.mvista.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Return-path: Received: from mail.dev.rtsoft.ru ([213.79.90.226]:40641 "HELO mail.dev.rtsoft.ru" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1754107Ab0CCNPG (ORCPT ); Wed, 3 Mar 2010 08:15:06 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4B8D846F.3080400@garzik.org> Sender: linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org To: Jeff Garzik Cc: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Mar 02, 2010 at 04:34:39PM -0500, Jeff Garzik wrote: [...] > As demonstrated in libata-dev.git#libahci, I think the best route is > to move generic code into libahci. In #libahci you will see > > libahci -> common code > ahci -> standard PCI driver, req's libahci > mv-ahci -> Marvell AHCI driver, req's libahci > acard-ahci -> ACard AHCI driver, req's libahci > > and to this we could easily add > > platform-ahci -> platform AHCI driver, req's libahci > > WARNING: #libahci should not be used directly, it is meant for > illustration purposes only. It has not been properly updated for > several recent ahci.c changes upstream, which implies that the > trivial-and-obvious task of moving generic code from ahci.c to > libahci.c must be redone. Well, do I understand correctly that the only issue is the file names? I.e. in my patches, instead of keeping the library code in ahci.c, I should move the library code into libahci.c, and keep the PCI code in ahci.c? Because, as far as I can see, the result of my patches is pretty much the same as in #libahci, except the file names and more things that can be reused (i.e. ahci_sht, ahci_ops -- I kept all this in the library part, since we want to share it with the platform driver). Also, I don't export function that aren't currently used by PCI or platform drivers, but in #libahci there are all exported. Should I keep it my way, or should I export all the functions (even if there are no any users of these)? > P.S. Please use the email addresses in MAINTAINERS, > > M: Jeff Garzik > L: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org > > The redhat.com email address is only used for legal (sign-off) > purposes, not normal use. Got it, thanks! -- Anton Vorontsov email: cbouatmailru@gmail.com irc://irc.freenode.net/bd2