On Dec 16,  5:55pm, Manuel Bouyer wrote:
} On Thu, Dec 16, 1999 at 11:22:49AM +0000, David Brownlee wrote:
} > 	We already have a 'pciide' vs 'wdc' attachment.
} > 	Why not have 'pciide', 'ide', and 'wdc' attachments, allowing the
} > 	'ide' driver to keep up with the latest IDE standards and keeping
} > 	all the ESDI/MFM legacy code separate. The 'ide' driver can probe
} > 	and attach first. If it fails, the 'wdc' driver could try.
} > 	
} > 	If they both could attach, then pick the one which matches the
} > 	most drives :)
} 
} This is what I was going to say :)
} 
} The present ATA evolutions makes it harder and harder to support pre-ata
} hardware (hot-plug is also a problem). I've been thinking for some time now
} about a separate driver (which doesn't exclude common parts).
} The difference between wdc and ide attachements is easy: if the drive
} doesn't anserw to an IDENTIFY or ATAPI IDENTIFY ide will not attach.

     As has been pointed out in the past, ESDI drives do answer to
IDENTIFY, and they do so in an intelligent manner.

}-- End of excerpt from Manuel Bouyer