From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Matthew Garrett Subject: Re: RFC: ACPI/scsi/libata integration and hotswap Date: Fri, 9 Dec 2005 11:52:36 +0000 Message-ID: <20051209115235.GB25771@srcf.ucam.org> References: <20051208132657.GA21529@srcf.ucam.org> <20051208133308.GA13267@infradead.org> <20051208133945.GA21633@srcf.ucam.org> <1134050498.17102.2.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20051208141811.GB21715@srcf.ucam.org> <1134052433.17102.17.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20051208145257.GB21946@srcf.ucam.org> <20051208171901.GA22451@srcf.ucam.org> <20051209114246.GB16945@infradead.org> <20051209114944.GA1068@havoc.gtf.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20051209114944.GA1068@havoc.gtf.org> Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Jeff Garzik Cc: Christoph Hellwig , Alan Cox , randy_d_dunlap@linux.intel.com, linux-ide@vger.kernel.org, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, acpi-devel@lists.sourceforge.net List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Dec 09, 2005 at 06:49:44AM -0500, Jeff Garzik wrote: > If this is just for libata, it's still at the wrong level. > > libata will eventually make the SCSI simulator optional, which means > any acpi_scsi_init() or whatnot won't work for libata. It depends on notification whenever a device is added to the scsi bus class, so it needs access to scsi_bus_type. While that could be put in the libata layer, it seems cleaner to leave it in scsi and then add another callback for libata when it moves to its own bus class. -- Matthew Garrett | mjg59@srcf.ucam.org