From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mike Anderson Subject: Re: Notify about errors during initialization Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 11:04:52 -0800 Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org Message-ID: <20040106190452.GB2119@beaverton.ibm.com> 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> <20040106180832.A19009@infradead.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from e32.co.us.ibm.com ([32.97.110.130]:41983 "EHLO e32.co.us.ibm.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S264604AbUAFTBG (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 Jan 2004 14:01:06 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20040106180832.A19009@infradead.org> List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: Christoph Hellwig Cc: Patrick Mansfield , Alan Stern , James Bottomley , Matthew Dharm , USB Storage List , SCSI development list Christoph Hellwig [hch@infradead.org] wrote: > 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. ok, I was reading two replies back when you mentioned "scsi_scan_host_parallel". I re-read the last reply and see that scsi_scan_host would just send a scan event. -andmike -- Michael Anderson andmike@us.ibm.com