Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Mon, Feb 06, 2006 at 10:03:38AM +0900, Horms wrote: >> On Fri, Feb 03, 2006 at 10:24:51AM +0100, Sven Luther wrote: >> > On Fri, Feb 03, 2006 at 01:51:52AM +0000, Horms wrote: >> > > Stephen Gran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> > > > >> > > > Oh look, why are you still fighting about this? It seems to me that >> > > > the >> > > > real problem is that the via module doesn't declare a relation to >> > > > ide-generic in situations where it actually does need it. Why not fix >> > > > the kernel, so that yaird doesn't have to bend over backwards? Not >> > > > that >> > > > I really care either way, but it does seem to me to be cleaner to fix >> > > > the underlying problem rather than adding increasingly nonsensical >> > > > special case code somewhere else to work around it. >> > > >> > > Can someone cook up a patch for this and send it upstream and/or here? >> > >> > I guess this means someone needs to investigate it with the hardware that >> > is >> > broken in the first place. Nobody seemed interested in doing so, and i >> > don't >> > have broken via-ide x86 hardware myself. >> > >> > Now, can we please get the borken hack in yaird be backed out or at least >> > disabled on powerpc as my patch proposed ? >> >> As I subsequently mentioned on IRC, I have some Via hardware, though I'm >> not sure if its broken or not. If someone wants me to run tests, please >> let me know. > > What we need to know is why the x86 via driver apparently needs the > ide-generic module to be loaded after the via-ide one, while there doesn't > seem to be a difference on powerpc who doesn't even build ide-generic. > > Could you try booting your via board with just viac8xx or whatever it is > named, and not including the ide-generic file (means patching > /usr/lib/yaird/perl/Hardware.pm, where it is hardcoded).
Sure, I will try and test that out. Though it won't be toady. -- Horms -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
