From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: James Bottomley Subject: Re: Patches for SCSI scanning Date: 18 Apr 2004 18:16:31 -0500 Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org Message-ID: <1082330192.1969.37.camel@mulgrave> References: <20040418185751.GC4868@tpkurt.garloff.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from stat1.steeleye.com ([65.114.3.130]:33977 "EHLO hancock.sc.steeleye.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S264207AbUDRXQh (ORCPT ); Sun, 18 Apr 2004 19:16:37 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20040418185751.GC4868@tpkurt.garloff.de> List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: Kurt Garloff Cc: Linux SCSI list , Andrew Morton On Sun, 2004-04-18 at 13:57, Kurt Garloff wrote: > An alternative to the blacklist is to offer boot/module parameters > again. This is what the following series of 6 patches do. > Most don't really depend on each other, but they'll only apply > cleanly in the order sent. > > I did not yet compare our 2.4 blacklist with the 2.6 one; I'll > port our additional 2.4 entries to 2.6 soon. Erm, Kurt, we already have a module load time parameter for altering both blacklist entries and scanning defaults. It's dev_flags and default_dev_flags in scsi_devinfo.c Could you first explain why you can't use this existing infrastructure? Thanks, James