Re: "ide=reverse" do we still need this?

[Rene Herman]

On 13-02-08 13:16, Michael Ellerman wrote:

> On Wed, 2008-02-13 at 13:06 +0100, Rene Herman wrote:
> > On 13-02-08 05:44, Greg KH wrote:
> >
> > > > While details escape me somewhat again at the monment, a few months ago
> > > > I was playing around with a PCI Promise IDE controller and needed
> > > > ide=reverse to save me from having to switch disks around to still have
> > > > a bootable system.
> > > >
> > > > Or some such. Not too clear anymore, but I remember it saved the day.
> > > You couldn't just change the boot disk in grub?
> > >
> > > Or use an initramfs and /dev/disk/by-id/ to keep any future moves stable?
> > No. The thing is that you need these kinds of hacks while messing with old 
> > systems, building and stripping them, often in recovery type of situations.
> >
> > As said (same as the other person I saw reacting) details of what was most 
> > decidedly needed last time around escape me at the moment, but ide=reverse 
> > is the kind of hack that saves one hours of unscrewing computer cases and 
> > switching disks around while building stuff, making quick tests, doing 
> > recovery...
> >
> > If it must go for the greater architectural good, so be it, but it's the 
> > type of thing that's used specifically in the situations where you don't 
> > have stable, well arranged (or known!) setups to begin with.
>
> I might be off the deep end, but isn't this what
> Documentation/feature-removal-schedule.txt is for?

Documentation/feature-removal-schedule.txt is for asking/discussing whether 
or not features should be removed? No, I don't think so. It seems to be a 
schedule of when to remove features.

Rene.


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/