From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [patch][0/15] qlogicfas/qlogic_cs Date: Tue, 9 Mar 2004 15:20:02 +0000 Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org Message-ID: <20040309152002.A9111@infradead.org> References: <20031020232200.GA473@cathedrallabs.org> <20040219150747.A23822@infradead.org> <20040219172619.GA667@cathedrallabs.org> <1077399404.2285.10.camel@mulgrave> <20040309133217.GB651@cathedrallabs.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from phoenix.infradead.org ([213.86.99.234]:58898 "EHLO phoenix.infradead.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261992AbUCIPUH (ORCPT ); Tue, 9 Mar 2004 10:20:07 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20040309133217.GB651@cathedrallabs.org>; from aris@cathedrallabs.org on Tue, Mar 09, 2004 at 10:32:17AM -0300 List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: Aristeu Sergio Rozanski Filho Cc: James Bottomley , Christoph Hellwig , SCSI Mailing List On Tue, Mar 09, 2004 at 10:32:17AM -0300, Aristeu Sergio Rozanski Filho wrote: > > I'll put them in, but first I think the qlogicfas attachment type needs > > to be all new style. > please drop all patches that I've sent before and consider applying these > I'm sending instead. I wonder if will be worth to split qlogicfas in two > different modules: one for hardware functions and other for qlogicfas driver > so qlogic_cs can share the same code instead copying it. comments? I think that would be a good idea.