* RE: should we remove cpqfc from the Linux 2.6 tree?
@ 2004-09-20 14:24 Miller, Mike (OS Dev)
2004-09-20 14:29 ` Christoph Hellwig
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Miller, Mike (OS Dev) @ 2004-09-20 14:24 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Christoph Hellwig, Kantharia, Chirag (STSD), mkp
Cc: ISS StorageDev, linux-scsi
> Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>
> I remember mkp had some interested in reactivating that
> driver, is that
> still true? I'd prefer to kill it from the tree and re-merge it if
> we get a sane one, but the current one is doing far to bad things that
> I'd want to waste any ressources on it when moving the
> remaining drivers
> over to the current APIs.
>
HP agrees with the recommendation to remove cpqfc from the tree until it can be fully 2.6 compliant.
mikem
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: should we remove cpqfc from the Linux 2.6 tree?
2004-09-20 14:24 should we remove cpqfc from the Linux 2.6 tree? Miller, Mike (OS Dev)
@ 2004-09-20 14:29 ` Christoph Hellwig
0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Christoph Hellwig @ 2004-09-20 14:29 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Miller, Mike (OS Dev)
Cc: Christoph Hellwig, Kantharia, Chirag (STSD), mkp, ISS StorageDev,
linux-scsi
On Mon, Sep 20, 2004 at 09:24:26AM -0500, Miller, Mike (OS Dev) wrote:
> HP agrees with the recommendation to remove cpqfc from the tree until it can be fully 2.6 compliant.
Does this mean HP is still supporting the driver and has plan to
resurrect the 2.6 version?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* RE: should we remove cpqfc from the Linux 2.6 tree?
@ 2004-09-20 14:47 Miller, Mike (OS Dev)
0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Miller, Mike (OS Dev) @ 2004-09-20 14:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Christoph Hellwig
Cc: Kantharia, Chirag (STSD), mkp, ISS StorageDev, linux-scsi
> On Mon, Sep 20, 2004 at 09:24:26AM -0500, Miller, Mike (OS Dev) wrote:
> > HP agrees with the recommendation to remove cpqfc from the
> tree until it can be fully 2.6 compliant.
>
> Does this mean HP is still supporting the driver and has plan to
> resurrect the 2.6 version?
>
We seem to have a small base of interested parties. As of right now we would like to revive the driver. Management may change that :( in the near/far future.
mikem
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* should we remove cpqfc from the Linux 2.6 tree?
@ 2004-09-18 20:32 Christoph Hellwig
0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Christoph Hellwig @ 2004-09-18 20:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: chirag.kantharia, mkp; +Cc: iss_storagedev, linux-scsi
I remember mkp had some interested in reactivating that driver, is that
still true? I'd prefer to kill it from the tree and re-merge it if
we get a sane one, but the current one is doing far to bad things that
I'd want to waste any ressources on it when moving the remaining drivers
over to the current APIs.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2004-09-20 14:48 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2004-09-20 14:24 should we remove cpqfc from the Linux 2.6 tree? Miller, Mike (OS Dev)
2004-09-20 14:29 ` Christoph Hellwig
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2004-09-20 14:47 Miller, Mike (OS Dev)
2004-09-18 20:32 Christoph Hellwig
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.