From: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@steeleye.com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Cc: SCSI Mailing List <linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] further sim710 updates
Date: 10 Feb 2003 09:27:27 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1044890849.2008.71.camel@mulgrave> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20030210085920.A11560@lst.de>
On Mon, 2003-02-10 at 01:59, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> and I think there's more that should be done, but this would change
> user-visiable attributes:
>
> - remove the ugly single module option code and the command line
> parsing in favour of Rusty's new module_param stuff
> - split the driver into two drivers: 53c700_eisa and 53c700_mca.
> There's no logic shared between those two busses, just a little
> bit of helper in the setup/remove code
Sounds good if you want to do a patch.
> And after looking a this driver I have some rants about the new
> mac/eisa code:
>
> - mca_register_driver/mca_unregister_driver should check for
> the precense of an MCA bus by themselves instead of leaving
> it to the caller
The if(MCA_bus) is unnecessary. If there's no MCA bus, no IDs will be
stored, so nothing will get attached.
> - eisa_driver_register should really return 0 for sucess
Yes.
> - mca_register_driver/mca_unregister_driver should be named
> mca_driver_register/mca_driver_unregister to be more similar
> to the other *driver_(un)registers.
Which others? I modelled the interface on PCI, which has
pci_register_driver() etc. I agree on standardisation, but the way I
did it was standard when the MCA bus code was written...
> --- 1.8/drivers/scsi/sim710.c Sun Feb 9 11:07:34 2003
> +++ edited/drivers/scsi/sim710.c Mon Feb 10 08:03:50 2003
> @@ -32,51 +32,18 @@
> #include <linux/blk.h>
> #include <linux/device.h>
> #include <linux/init.h>
> -#ifdef CONFIG_MCA
> #include <linux/mca.h>
> -#endif
This can't be done otherwise the driver won't compile on non x86 archs
(yes, I know, I'll fix the MCA header file...)
> + /*
> + * The eise_driver_register return values are strange. I have
> + * no idea why we don't just use river_register directly anyway..
> + */
I can answer that: Some of the driver registration routines have to do
bus and device fixups. There's no mechanism in the current
device_driver template. When taxed with the problem, Patrick Mochel
decided that retaining bus specific registration routines was the better
way forward.
James
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-02-10 15:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-02-10 7:59 [PATCH] further sim710 updates Christoph Hellwig
2003-02-10 15:27 ` James Bottomley [this message]
2003-02-10 15:32 ` Christoph Hellwig
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1044890849.2008.71.camel@mulgrave \
--to=james.bottomley@steeleye.com \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox