>-#ifdef CONFIG_ARCH_NETWINDER
>+#ifdef CONFIG_HOST_FOOTBRIDGE
>+if (machine_is_netwinder() || machine_is_my_board()) {
> [.../...]
>+}
That looks OK to me. If CONFIG_ARCH_NETWINDER is not set then
machine_is_netwinder() will expand to a constant 0 and gcc will probably leave
out the code inside the if in any case.
>I've not yet figured out what this added IDE code does (and why it's only
>defined for the netwinder), but I'm still having a problem with the
>second IDE controller of the winbond, which is still giving me
>lost_interrupts.
The NetWinder doesn't use the secondary IDE so this has probably not been
tested. What interrupt do you think the secondary controller should be using?
I'm also not sure why there are basically two different versions of
the code for this chip. I think the original version was written by the
PowerPC guys so you should probably talk to them and find out whether the two
can be somehow combined.
p.
unsubscribe: body of `unsubscribe linux-arm' to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
