Hi Simon, On Sun, Feb 7, 2016 at 4:29 AM, Simon Glass <s...@chromium.org> wrote: > Hi Bin, > > On 3 February 2016 at 04:59, Mugunthan V N <mugunthan...@ti.com> wrote: >> >> Implement scsi_init() api to probe driver model based sata >> devices. >> >> Signed-off-by: Mugunthan V N <mugunthan...@ti.com> >> --- >> drivers/block/disk-uclass.c | 39 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+) > > This patch seems odd to me. I would hope that scsi_init() would go > away with driver model and it would happen as part of the controller > probe. But of course we cannot probe SCSI from UCLASS_DISK. I think > the uclass 'disk' is too broad to be useful. >
I agree. I raised similar comment before that this just looks a place holder for the SCSI stuff. > So I am wondering whether the decision to use UCLASS_DISK instead of > UCLASS_AHCI was a mistake. > > Perhaps instead we should have: > > UCLASS_AHCI > UCLASS_SCSI > UCLASS_MMC > etc... > I still think UCLASS_AHCI is not a good name. Maybe UCLASS_ATA as we are talking about protocols here (SCSI, MMC). > and each of these devices can have a UCLASS_BLK under them (the block device). > > Possibly we could even have a dummy UCLASS_DISK device under each of > the above, but I'm not sure that is useful. > > What do you think? > [snip] Regards, Bin _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
