From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [PATCH] tmscsim: new interfaces Date: Fri, 28 May 2004 14:00:01 +0100 Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org Message-ID: <20040528130001.GA27804@infradead.org> References: <20040526114521.GA24166@infradead.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from [213.146.154.40] ([213.146.154.40]:8374 "EHLO pentafluge.infradead.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262873AbUE1NAG (ORCPT ); Fri, 28 May 2004 09:00:06 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: Guennadi Liakhovetski Cc: James Bottomley , Kurt Garloff , Linux SCSI list On Thu, May 27, 2004 at 11:20:50PM +0200, Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote: > On Wed, 26 May 2004, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > > Looks like a way to go. I'm not sure what scan_device is supposed to > > do as I already wrote, but from looking at when it's set/cleared I'm > > pretty sure it tries to indicate whethere we're currently scanning for > > devices. And useing slave_alloc/slave_configure is a much safer way to > > find that out then guessing from the commands sent. > > Attached is a patch, that moves scan_device to > slave_alloc/_configure/_destroy, as you suggested (to be precise, as I > understood your suggestion:-)). Please consider. The patch also contains > some more clean-up. Don't know, if you, James, would prefer it as a > separate patch, or left alone altogether. Those minor details are > disturbing the eye, but are, perhaps, not important enough to bother you > with a separate patch:-) But if you want it separate - no problem, will do > that. > > As usual, tested on my AM53C974. Looks good to me.