From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [PATCH] further sim710 updates Date: Mon, 10 Feb 2003 16:32:28 +0100 Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org Message-ID: <20030210163228.A14769@lst.de> References: <20030210085920.A11560@lst.de> <1044890849.2008.71.camel@mulgrave> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1044890849.2008.71.camel@mulgrave>; from James.Bottomley@steeleye.com on Mon, Feb 10, 2003 at 09:27:27AM -0600 List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: James Bottomley Cc: SCSI Mailing List On Mon, Feb 10, 2003 at 09:27:27AM -0600, James Bottomley wrote: > 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. This will be in the next patch revision. > > - 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. Ok. > > - 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... eisa and the plain, non-prefix versions. Okay, maybe MCA is okay, but at least it's inconsistant.. > > @@ -32,51 +32,18 @@ > > #include > > #include > > #include > > -#ifdef CONFIG_MCA > > #include > > -#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...) If I split the EISA/MCA parts into separate driver we won't have that problem anymore.