[00/32] pata_parport-bpck6: rework bpck6 protocol driver

Message ID 20230307224627.28011-1-linux@zary.sk
Headers
Series pata_parport-bpck6: rework bpck6 protocol driver |

Message

Ondrej Zary March 7, 2023, 10:45 p.m. UTC
  This patch series simplifies bpck6 code, removing ppc6lnx.c file to match
the simplicity of other protocol drivers. It also converts the direct
port I/O access to paraport access functions. This conversion revealed that
there's no 8-bit and 16-bit EPP support in parport_pc so patch 11 implements
that.

Tested with Backpack CD-RW 222011 and CD-RW 19350.

Signed-off-by: Ondrej Zary <linux@zary.sk>
---
 drivers/ata/pata_parport/bpck6.c   | 452 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------
 drivers/ata/pata_parport/ppc6lnx.c | 726 ---------------------------------------------------------
 drivers/parport/parport_pc.c       |  20 +-
 include/uapi/linux/parport.h       |   3 +
 4 files changed, 370 insertions(+), 831 deletions(-)
  

Comments

Sergey Shtylyov March 11, 2023, 8 p.m. UTC | #1
Hello!

On 3/8/23 1:45 AM, Ondrej Zary wrote:

> This patch series simplifies bpck6 code, removing ppc6lnx.c file to match
> the simplicity of other protocol drivers. It also converts the direct
> port I/O access to paraport access functions. This conversion revealed that
> there's no 8-bit and 16-bit EPP support in parport_pc so patch 11 implements
> that.
> 
> Tested with Backpack CD-RW 222011 and CD-RW 19350.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Ondrej Zary <linux@zary.sk>
> ---
>  drivers/ata/pata_parport/bpck6.c   | 452 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------
>  drivers/ata/pata_parport/ppc6lnx.c | 726 ---------------------------------------------------------
>  drivers/parport/parport_pc.c       |  20 +-
>  include/uapi/linux/parport.h       |   3 +
>  4 files changed, 370 insertions(+), 831 deletions(-)

   OK, it's finally clear I can't keep up with reviewing 32 patches posted
at once...  Luckily, all those patches seem to be dealing with parallel port
control), not the PATA control! Of course, when I volunteered to review the
PATA driver patches, I didn't expect such patch volumes -- I mostly expected
some odd fixes, not a massive driver rework... :-/

MBR, Sergey
  
Ondrej Zary March 18, 2023, 6:55 p.m. UTC | #2
On Saturday 11 March 2023 21:00:01 Sergey Shtylyov wrote:
> Hello!
> 
> On 3/8/23 1:45 AM, Ondrej Zary wrote:
> 
> > This patch series simplifies bpck6 code, removing ppc6lnx.c file to match
> > the simplicity of other protocol drivers. It also converts the direct
> > port I/O access to paraport access functions. This conversion revealed that
> > there's no 8-bit and 16-bit EPP support in parport_pc so patch 11 implements
> > that.
> > 
> > Tested with Backpack CD-RW 222011 and CD-RW 19350.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Ondrej Zary <linux@zary.sk>
> > ---
> >  drivers/ata/pata_parport/bpck6.c   | 452 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------
> >  drivers/ata/pata_parport/ppc6lnx.c | 726 ---------------------------------------------------------
> >  drivers/parport/parport_pc.c       |  20 +-
> >  include/uapi/linux/parport.h       |   3 +
> >  4 files changed, 370 insertions(+), 831 deletions(-)
> 
>    OK, it's finally clear I can't keep up with reviewing 32 patches posted
> at once...  Luckily, all those patches seem to be dealing with parallel port
> control), not the PATA control! Of course, when I volunteered to review the
> PATA driver patches, I didn't expect such patch volumes -- I mostly expected
> some odd fixes, not a massive driver rework... :-/

So you're going to review the (P)ATA parts (if any) only.
Maybe Sudip (as parport maintainer) could review the parallel port parts?
  
Sergey Shtylyov March 19, 2023, 8:02 p.m. UTC | #3
On 3/18/23 9:55 PM, Ondrej Zary wrote:

>>> This patch series simplifies bpck6 code, removing ppc6lnx.c file to match
>>> the simplicity of other protocol drivers. It also converts the direct
>>> port I/O access to paraport access functions. This conversion revealed that
>>> there's no 8-bit and 16-bit EPP support in parport_pc so patch 11 implements
>>> that.
>>>
>>> Tested with Backpack CD-RW 222011 and CD-RW 19350.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Ondrej Zary <linux@zary.sk>
>>> ---
>>>  drivers/ata/pata_parport/bpck6.c   | 452 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------
>>>  drivers/ata/pata_parport/ppc6lnx.c | 726 ---------------------------------------------------------
>>>  drivers/parport/parport_pc.c       |  20 +-
>>>  include/uapi/linux/parport.h       |   3 +
>>>  4 files changed, 370 insertions(+), 831 deletions(-)
>>
>>    OK, it's finally clear I can't keep up with reviewing 32 patches posted
>> at once...  Luckily, all those patches seem to be dealing with parallel port
>> control), not the PATA control! Of course, when I volunteered to review the
>> PATA driver patches, I didn't expect such patch volumes -- I mostly expected
>> some odd fixes, not a massive driver rework... :-/
> 
> So you're going to review the (P)ATA parts (if any) only.

   I saw no PATA parts in this patcheset...

> Maybe Sudip (as parport maintainer) could review the parallel port parts?

   I have no objections! :-)

MBR, Sergey
  
Ondrej Zary March 22, 2023, 12:10 p.m. UTC | #4
On Sunday 19 March 2023 21:02:43 Sergey Shtylyov wrote:
> On 3/18/23 9:55 PM, Ondrej Zary wrote:
> 
> >>> This patch series simplifies bpck6 code, removing ppc6lnx.c file to match
> >>> the simplicity of other protocol drivers. It also converts the direct
> >>> port I/O access to paraport access functions. This conversion revealed that
> >>> there's no 8-bit and 16-bit EPP support in parport_pc so patch 11 implements
> >>> that.
> >>>
> >>> Tested with Backpack CD-RW 222011 and CD-RW 19350.
> >>>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Ondrej Zary <linux@zary.sk>
> >>> ---
> >>>  drivers/ata/pata_parport/bpck6.c   | 452 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------
> >>>  drivers/ata/pata_parport/ppc6lnx.c | 726 ---------------------------------------------------------
> >>>  drivers/parport/parport_pc.c       |  20 +-
> >>>  include/uapi/linux/parport.h       |   3 +
> >>>  4 files changed, 370 insertions(+), 831 deletions(-)
> >>
> >>    OK, it's finally clear I can't keep up with reviewing 32 patches posted
> >> at once...  Luckily, all those patches seem to be dealing with parallel port
> >> control), not the PATA control! Of course, when I volunteered to review the
> >> PATA driver patches, I didn't expect such patch volumes -- I mostly expected
> >> some odd fixes, not a massive driver rework... :-/
> > 
> > So you're going to review the (P)ATA parts (if any) only.
> 
>    I saw no PATA parts in this patcheset...
> 
> > Maybe Sudip (as parport maintainer) could review the parallel port parts?
> 
>    I have no objections! :-)

Looks like Sudip does not care. What needs to be done so this can be merged?
  
Damien Le Moal March 22, 2023, 10:34 p.m. UTC | #5
On 3/22/23 21:10, Ondrej Zary wrote:
> On Sunday 19 March 2023 21:02:43 Sergey Shtylyov wrote:
>> On 3/18/23 9:55 PM, Ondrej Zary wrote:
>>
>>>>> This patch series simplifies bpck6 code, removing ppc6lnx.c file to match
>>>>> the simplicity of other protocol drivers. It also converts the direct
>>>>> port I/O access to paraport access functions. This conversion revealed that
>>>>> there's no 8-bit and 16-bit EPP support in parport_pc so patch 11 implements
>>>>> that.
>>>>>
>>>>> Tested with Backpack CD-RW 222011 and CD-RW 19350.
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Ondrej Zary <linux@zary.sk>
>>>>> ---
>>>>>  drivers/ata/pata_parport/bpck6.c   | 452 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------
>>>>>  drivers/ata/pata_parport/ppc6lnx.c | 726 ---------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>  drivers/parport/parport_pc.c       |  20 +-
>>>>>  include/uapi/linux/parport.h       |   3 +
>>>>>  4 files changed, 370 insertions(+), 831 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>>    OK, it's finally clear I can't keep up with reviewing 32 patches posted
>>>> at once...  Luckily, all those patches seem to be dealing with parallel port
>>>> control), not the PATA control! Of course, when I volunteered to review the
>>>> PATA driver patches, I didn't expect such patch volumes -- I mostly expected
>>>> some odd fixes, not a massive driver rework... :-/
>>>
>>> So you're going to review the (P)ATA parts (if any) only.
>>
>>    I saw no PATA parts in this patcheset...
>>
>>> Maybe Sudip (as parport maintainer) could review the parallel port parts?
>>
>>    I have no objections! :-)
> 
> Looks like Sudip does not care. What needs to be done so this can be merged?

I will have a look at the series this morning and merge it if I do not see any
issues.
  
Sudip Mukherjee March 26, 2023, 9:08 a.m. UTC | #6
On Wed, 22 Mar 2023 at 12:11, Ondrej Zary <linux@zary.sk> wrote:
>
> On Sunday 19 March 2023 21:02:43 Sergey Shtylyov wrote:
> > On 3/18/23 9:55 PM, Ondrej Zary wrote:
> >
> > >>> This patch series simplifies bpck6 code, removing ppc6lnx.c file to match
> > >>> the simplicity of other protocol drivers. It also converts the direct
> > >>> port I/O access to paraport access functions. This conversion revealed that
> > >>> there's no 8-bit and 16-bit EPP support in parport_pc so patch 11 implements
> > >>> that.
> > >>>
> > >>> Tested with Backpack CD-RW 222011 and CD-RW 19350.
> > >>>
> > >>> Signed-off-by: Ondrej Zary <linux@zary.sk>
> > >>> ---
> > >>>  drivers/ata/pata_parport/bpck6.c   | 452 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------
> > >>>  drivers/ata/pata_parport/ppc6lnx.c | 726 ---------------------------------------------------------
> > >>>  drivers/parport/parport_pc.c       |  20 +-
> > >>>  include/uapi/linux/parport.h       |   3 +
> > >>>  4 files changed, 370 insertions(+), 831 deletions(-)
> > >>
> > >>    OK, it's finally clear I can't keep up with reviewing 32 patches posted
> > >> at once...  Luckily, all those patches seem to be dealing with parallel port
> > >> control), not the PATA control! Of course, when I volunteered to review the
> > >> PATA driver patches, I didn't expect such patch volumes -- I mostly expected
> > >> some odd fixes, not a massive driver rework... :-/
> > >
> > > So you're going to review the (P)ATA parts (if any) only.
> >
> >    I saw no PATA parts in this patcheset...
> >
> > > Maybe Sudip (as parport maintainer) could review the parallel port parts?
> >
> >    I have no objections! :-)
>
> Looks like Sudip does not care. What needs to be done so this can be merged?

oops.. sorry. I missed it.