[PATCH V6 2/5] ahci_plt Add the board_ids and pi refer to different features

[Richard Zhu]

Hi:
One more concern, the .../drivers/ata/ahci.h file should be moved to
.../include/linux/ folder.
Because that the kinds of macros used in the ata_port_info and the
ahci_pmp_retry_srst_ops are
all defined in the .../drivers/ata/ahci.h file.
Otherwise, the ata_port_info can't be defined in the board related
platform data.

How we can handle this case?

Best Regard
Richard Zhu

On 30 August 2011 14:21, Richard Zhu <richard.zhu at linaro.org> wrote:
> Hi:
> Pass port info from the platform data is a good idea.
> About the codes duplication in the board level, I think that we can
> re-use the default  port info on most boards, when the ata_port_info
> is null in the platform data struct.
> We can leave the ahci_platform.c without any modifications in this way.
>
> How do you guys think about?
>
> Best Regard
> Richard Zhu
>
>
> On 29 August 2011 20:25, Eric Miao <eric.miao at linaro.org> wrote:
>> On Mon, Aug 29, 2011 at 8:12 PM, Anton Vorontsov <cbouatmailru at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> On Mon, Aug 29, 2011 at 03:18:55PM +0800, Richard Zhu wrote:
>>>> On imx53 AHCI, soft reset fails with IPMS set when PMP
>>>> is enabled but SATA HDD/ODD is connected to SATA port,
>>>> do soft reset again to port 0.
>>>> So the 'ahci_pmp_retry_srst_ops' is required when imx53
>>>> ahci is present.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Richard Zhu <richard.zhu at linaro.org>
>>>> ---
>>> [...]
>>>>       struct device *dev = &pdev->dev;
>>>>       struct ahci_platform_data *pdata = dev->platform_data;
>>>> -     struct ata_port_info pi = {
>>>> -             .flags          = AHCI_FLAG_COMMON,
>>>> -             .pio_mask       = ATA_PIO4,
>>>> -             .udma_mask      = ATA_UDMA6,
>>>> -             .port_ops       = &ahci_ops,
>>>> -     };
>>>> +     struct platform_device_id *id_entry = platform_get_device_id(pdev);
>>>> +     struct ata_port_info pi = ahci_port_info[id_entry->driver_data];
>>>
>>> Why not pass port info via platform_data? It seems to be platform
>>> specific nowadays, so leave the default as is, but let the platforms
>>> pass their own port info through platform_data.
>>
>> That's also a very clean way. However I have the concern that it might
>> end up with many duplicate entries.
>>
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> --
>>> Anton Vorontsov
>>> Email: cbouatmailru at gmail.com
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> linux-arm-kernel mailing list
>>> linux-arm-kernel at lists.infradead.org
>>> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
>>>
>>
>