From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: John Garry Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 00/32] HiSilicon SAS driver Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2015 09:46:56 +0000 Message-ID: <564D9A90.2070304@huawei.com> References: <1447779059-136143-1-git-send-email-john.garry@huawei.com> <564CB40B.1050705@huawei.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="gbk"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: "Martin K. Petersen" Cc: "JBottomley@odin.com" , "robh+dt@kernel.org" , "pawel.moll@arm.com" , "mark.rutland@arm.com" , "ijc+devicetree@hellion.org.uk" , "galak@codeaurora.org" , "arnd@arndb.de" , "linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" , Linuxarm , "john.garry2@mail.dcu.ie" , "hare@suse.de" , "xuwei (O)" , "zhangfei.gao@linaro.org" List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org On 19/11/2015 03:15, Martin K. Petersen wrote: >>>>>> "John" == John Garry writes: > > John> thanks, please note that we still have the dependency on > John> http://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg452833.html > > John> Without it the driver can only be built into the kernel, and not > John> as a module. > > I have your driver in a staging branch rather than the main 4.5 SCSI > queue because I wanted to see what kind of additional fallout I'd get > from the zeroday testing. > > It's not a problem for me to wait for that patch to go in (or take it > through SCSI if that makes things easier). > The issue is the I don't know if Rob will approve the requested patch. As an alternative I can make my driver not depend on it. So I could make a v6 patchset or just send a supplementary patch on top of v5 patchset. Thanks, John