From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mike Anderson Subject: Re: [PATCH] scsi host cleanup 3/3 (driver changes) Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2002 13:05:43 -0700 Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org Message-ID: <20021010200543.GB1348@beaverton.ibm.com> References: <20021010164633.GA1348@beaverton.ibm.com> <200210101659.g9AGxCA02928@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200210101659.g9AGxCA02928@localhost.localdomain> List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: James Bottomley Cc: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org James Bottomley [James.Bottomley@steeleye.com] wrote: > I (finally) got around to looking at the patches. There were only a few minor > quibbles, really boiling down to the fact that you export some functions > beginning shost_ instead of scsi_ (shost_tp_for_each_host, > shost_chk_and_release). I can't see any reason why this might cause a naming > clash, but I think it is safer to stick to exports beginning with scsi_. Ok will change to scsi_. > > Also, why do we now have some functions beginning scsi_host and some beginning > scsi_shost? Could we just use one or the other (I'd vote for scsi_host, since > it's shorter). > Ok. will change to scsi_host. Currently I waiting on a re-roll because of an issue currently with the patch relating to driverfs registration. Since I moved a lot of functionality to scsi_register (which I wanted to do because of past issues / comments) I am registering the host with driverfs prior to scsi_set_pci_device being called by the host driver. This result in scsi(n) showing up under root. I could move registration into the scsi_set_pci_device function, but was wanting to wait until we get some driverfs layout issues understood. -andmike -- Michael Anderson andmike@us.ibm.com