From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff Garzik Subject: Re: [PATCH] Marvell 6440 SAS/SATA driver (draft) Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2008 02:21:08 -0500 Message-ID: <4785C764.3070407@garzik.org> References: <6b2481670801092253v666e969doe5ec2bd77e10a87e@mail.gmail.com> <4785C48C.50705@garzik.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from srv5.dvmed.net ([207.36.208.214]:51681 "EHLO mail.dvmed.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752564AbYAJHVL (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Jan 2008 02:21:11 -0500 In-Reply-To: <4785C48C.50705@garzik.org> Sender: linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org To: Ke Wei Cc: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, kewei@marvell.com, qswang@marvell.com, jfeng@marvell.com, IDE/ATA development list Jeff Garzik wrote: > 1) To make it easier for people to review and test the driver, I would > suggest posting a diff against 2.6.24-rc7 (or 2.6.23), ignoring my > original code. Thus, it would result in a patch Er, that sentence was incomplete. Continuing... Thus it would result in a patch that adds a new file drivers/scsi/mvsas.c to the 2.6.24-rc7 kernel, and modifies drivers/scsi/Makefile and drivers/scsi/Kconfig to enable this new driver. That is the format that developers and users are most familiar with, when reviewing (and testing) a new driver. But of course this is a draft, so these guidelines are certainly loose... Jeff