From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: Notify about errors during initialization Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 18:08:32 +0000 Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org Message-ID: <20040106180832.A19009@infradead.org> References: <20040105021047.GD30408@one-eyed-alien.net> <20040105221302.A7678@infradead.org> <20040105233221.GC1936@beaverton.ibm.com> <20040106161731.A17858@infradead.org> <20040106091538.A10957@beaverton.ibm.com> <20040106171843.A18507@infradead.org> <20040106180814.GA2119@beaverton.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from phoenix.infradead.org ([213.86.99.234]:8463 "EHLO phoenix.infradead.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S264889AbUAFSIm (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 Jan 2004 13:08:42 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20040106180814.GA2119@beaverton.ibm.com>; from andmike@us.ibm.com on Tue, Jan 06, 2004 at 10:08:14AM -0800 List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: Christoph Hellwig , Patrick Mansfield , Alan Stern , James Bottomley , Matthew Dharm , USB Storage List , SCSI development list On Tue, Jan 06, 2004 at 10:08:14AM -0800, Mike Anderson wrote: > > Because some drivers (like the ieee1394) don't want scanning to happen. > > They can easily chose that by not sending a scan event. > > > > Couldn't the user space also set the policy to scan or not scan? It > would seem that user space would be more flexible and not need a new > api (Just do not call scsi_scan_host). For ieee1394 scanning doesn't make any sense, so I don't see why it should scan at all. And I don't understand that API argument at all. With my suggestion scsi_scan_host would be changed to send the hotplug even - not change in API at all.