From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Shaya Potter <spotter@cs.columbia.edu>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 17/17] BLOCK: Make it possible to disable
	the	block	layer [try #2]
Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2006 09:27:08 -0400
Message-ID: <1157030829.4381.14.camel@localhost.localdomain>
References: <20060829115138.GA32714@infradead.org>
	 <20060825142753.GK10659@infradead.org>
	 <20060824213252.21323.18226.stgit@warthog.cambridge.redhat.com>
	 <20060824213334.21323.76323.stgit@warthog.cambridge.redhat.com>
	 <10117.1156522985@warthog.cambridge.redhat.com>
	 <15945.1156854198@warthog.cambridge.redhat.com>
	 <20060829122501.GA7814@infradead.org> <20060829195845.GA13357@kroah.com>
	 <17652.44254.620358.974993@stoffel.org>
	 <20060831030134.GA4919@parisc-linux.org>
	 <1156993496.4381.3.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	 <44F6A385.9090508@s5r6.in-berlin.de>
	 <1157027520.4381.10.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	 <44F6E12B.1090700@s5r6.in-berlin.de>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: Matthew Wilcox <matthew@wil.cx>, John Stoffel <john@stoffel.org>,
	Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
	David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>,
	linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	zippel@linux-m68k.org
Return-path: <linux-kernel-owner+glk-linux-kernel-3=40m.gmane.org-S932280AbWHaN1b@vger.kernel.org>
To: Stefan Richter <stefanr@s5r6.in-berlin.de>
In-Reply-To: <44F6E12B.1090700@s5r6.in-berlin.de>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org

On Thu, 2006-08-31 at 15:16 +0200, Stefan Richter wrote:
> Shaya Potter wrote:
> > when I said "driver" I meant more along the line of SCSI hardware
> > instead of things that use the "Linux" scsi subsystem.
> [...]
> > So you have a "virtual" SCSI_SUBSYSTEM which usb-storage, sbp2, sata all
> > pull in by selecting it.
> > 
> > you have SCSI_HARDWARE that adaptec, buslogic, lsilogic...... depend on.
> > SCSI_HARDWARE would also select "SCSI_SUBSYSTEM".
> 
> One nit: SBP-2 is SCSI.

ok, but you should get the point.  

basically anything "selectable" perhaps should be a purely "virtual" (as
in not shown in XYZconfig) option.

how one wants to name the options doesn't really bother me.