Hello.

Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote:

quoted

quoted

driver to using platform-device. I got a reply, that it's not worth it now 
that IDE is slowly becoming obsolete, and the pata_platform serves the 
perpose perfectly well. I found this argument reasonable, I had the same 
doubt, just wanted to double-check. So, why do we now need a new legacy 
(a/drivers/ide/legacy/ide_platform.c) driver when a "modern" driver 
exists?

quoted

We don't *need* it but some people still want to use old IDE and the
author was willing to make it neatly compatible so that anything that
works with the pata_platform should be able to use the ide_platform
driver and vice versa. For the shorter term that can only be a good thing
- arch code doesn't need to care about which driver is used, end users
can pick and it doesn't end up adding new ties between code and old IDE.

Ok, thanks for the explanation Alan. So, there's no technical argument, 
just "being nice to the users", and add a new driver, which we know we'll 
have to remove soon, thus having to persuade its users, who by that time 

    Define "soon". :-)

will get used to it and will not want to invest money into switching to 
another one...

    Invest into what if the drivers are functionally identical?

Thanks
Guennadi

MBR, Sergei