From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Anton Blanchard Subject: Re: [PATCH] remove MULTI_LUN config option Date: Wed, 3 Sep 2003 04:20:10 +1000 Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org Message-ID: <20030902182009.GL1941@krispykreme> References: <20030902021145.GC1941@krispykreme> <3F5400E6.3000104@pobox.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from dp.samba.org ([66.70.73.150]:51592 "EHLO lists.samba.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S263840AbTIBSU4 (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 Sep 2003 14:20:56 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3F5400E6.3000104@pobox.com> List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: Jeff Garzik Cc: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org Hi, > I like the patch, but I worry about the above piece. I would think that > a better patch might make NAC_SCANLUN, LUN_CHECK (tmscsim.c), and > similar bits conditional on the module_param you mention? Ditto for the > loops which are now unconditionally executed. They would still need to > be conditional on a runtime variable, right? Yep, we should be able to use max_scsi_luns to select these things. Im wondering why these #ifdefs were there in the first place and if it was the result of a copy from another driver or there really is a need to do this. Anton - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Hi, > I like the patch, but I worry about the above piece. I would think that > a better patch might make NAC_SCANLUN, LUN_CHECK (tmscsim.c), and > similar bits conditional on the module_param you mention? Ditto for the > loops which are now unconditionally executed. They would still need to > be conditional on a runtime variable, right? Yep, we should be able to use max_scsi_luns to select these things. Im wondering why these #ifdefs were there in the first place and if it was the result of a copy from another driver or there really is a need to do this. Anton