Re: Pending patches

[Mike Anderson <andmike@us.ibm.com>]

James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@SteelEye.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 2005-09-06 at 16:17 -0400, Alan Stern wrote:
> > http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-scsi&m=112238726326927&w=2

On as542. The first hunk of the diff is already in (declare of
scsi_host_set_state). The second hunk looks good (SHOST_RECOVERY label).
The third hunk I will take in combination with the other patch that
effects the scan code. This should have probably been
another patch.

> > http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-scsi&m=112238771326644&w=2

Have not looked at this yet, but will look at it in combination to the
above scan change.

> > http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-scsi&m=112238804301664&w=2

Do we need to revist how we are walking these lists for cleanup post
James's kilst fix / update?

> > http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-scsi&m=112238825727146&w=2

This looks ok for an added check, but I guess I need to look at old mail
and understand how we got here with the added scan mutex.

> 
> I was hoping that Mike Anderson would review these, but since he hasn't
> I'll take a look.

Sorry asleep at the keyboard on these. Comments above if you have not
already looked at them.

-andmike
--
Michael Anderson
andmike@us.ibm.com