From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Mark H Weaver <mhw@netris.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] linux-initrd: Add AHCI modules.
Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2014 17:40:39 -0400
Message-ID: <87ha2emjl4.fsf@yeeloong.lan>
References: <87mwc6wu9q.fsf@izanagi.i-did-not-set--mail-host-address--so-tickle-me>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Return-path: <guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:39406)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <mhw@netris.org>) id 1X8Fu7-0004bT-Nt
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 18 Jul 2014 17:41:30 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <mhw@netris.org>) id 1X8Fu0-0007qd-Ol
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 18 Jul 2014 17:41:23 -0400
Received: from world.peace.net ([96.39.62.75]:47635)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <mhw@netris.org>) id 1X8Fu0-0007oI-LR
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 18 Jul 2014 17:41:16 -0400
In-Reply-To: <87mwc6wu9q.fsf@izanagi.i-did-not-set--mail-host-address--so-tickle-me>
	(David Thompson's message of "Fri, 18 Jul 2014 11:39:45 -0400")
List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution."
	<guix-devel.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/guix-devel>,
	<mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:guix-devel@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guix-devel>,
	<mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Sender: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
To: David Thompson <dthompson2@worcester.edu>
Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org

David Thompson <dthompson2@worcester.edu> writes:

> One problem that Mark Weaver and I encountered when intalling the GNU
> system on our Thinkpad X60s was that initrd couldn't boot from our SATA
> hard disks without passing additional kernel modules in the
> operating-system declaration.  I think it would make a lot of sense to
> have these modules loaded by default, given the widespread use of SATA
> disks.
>
> I doubt that hardcoding the AHCI module names into linux-modules is the
> preferred way to do this, but I wanted to propose something simple to
> get the discussion started. :)
>
> Thoughts?

Another option would be to build AHCI support into the kernel.  I'm
currently testing a proposed patch.  I'm not sure whether this is better
or not; I'll leave it to others to decide :)

      Mark