Re: [2.6 patch] select ATA_SFF

[Mark Lord]

Sergei Shtylyov wrote:
> Alan Cox wrote:
>
> > > Sergei Shtylyov wrote:
>
> > > > > >   Jeff, Tejun, what "sff" in the file name actually means? Isn't 
> > > > > > it strange that the drivers lacking DMA support or not really 
> > > > > > compliant with SFF-8038i have to link with this file?
>
> > > > > Maybe it should be libata-tf and libata-bmdma, but sff (sans bmdma)
> > > > > and bmdma is acceptable, hopefully, right?
>
> > > >   What's sff sans bmdma?
>
> > > Supposed to be TF interface.  IIRC, the SFF term was first from Alan 
> > > although it's entirely possible that I misunderstood it and used it 
> > > in the wrong way.  Alan, can you please clear up the confusion?
>
> > The SFF/Intel spec is for PCI IDE (BMDMA or otherwise), so it covers and
> > defines all the common bits of the IDE interface on PCI (and in defining
> > the legacy interface conveniently documents the extended ST-412 interface
> > used by ATA and "pre-ATA" IDE/EIDE controllers).
>
>    If you mean SFF-8038i (which can indeed be named "SFF/Intel"), it
> documents *only* BMDMA.  If you mean something else, please be more 
> precise.
..

The "Intel PCI IDE Controller Specification Revision 1.0 3/4/94" doesn't mention
bmdma at all, but does document the taskfile register addresses.
It defers to ATA-1 for actual taskfile descriptions/functionality, though.

There's nothing particularly bad about the current naming we use, though.

Cheers
--
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/