Re: [patch] convert the scsi layer to use struct device

[Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>]

On Mon, Mar 17, 2008 at 12:57:20PM -0500, James Bottomley wrote:
> On Fri, 2008-03-14 at 12:15 -0500, James Bottomley wrote:
> > On Thu, 2008-03-13 at 14:06 -0700, Greg KH wrote:
> > > Here's a huge patch from Tony and Kay that converts the scsi layer to
> > > use struct device instead of class_device.
> > > 
> > > It doesn't seem like it could be split up any smaller due to the
> > > interconectedness of the whole mess, if you have any suggestions
> > > otherwise, it would be appreciated.
> > > 
> > > If you want, I can take this through my tree as it does depend on a
> > > previous IB patch to make that portion of the patch much smaller.
> > > 
> > > After this, all of the class_device code is now finally gone from the
> > > kernel!
> > 
> > Actually, I have it built and running (actually 2.6.25-rc5-mc5 which
> > includes all the changes in your tree).  Amazingly it's pretty much
> > fully functional, except ses which seems to have suffered a breakdown in
> > the way its model works.  I'll see if I can fix it up.
> > 
> > Since the patch is separable, it's probably best to take it through the
> > SCSI tree ... including the infiniband bits that depend on the
> > iser/iscsi transport classes.  You can give the rest of the infiniband
> > pieces to roland, since he's got a nasty set of clashes with the
> > __FUNCTION__->__func__ conversion which I don't want to be responsible
> > for.
> 
> OK, I've changed my mind ... it doesn't really work well without all the
> rest of the pieces ... plus I think there are going to be merge nasties
> which I'd rather you sorted out.

Ok, so what do you want me to do?  I can keep the scsi patch and the IB
patches in my tree and merge them that way, but I think it causes
problems with your scsi patches.  That will cause the -next and -mm tree
issues, right?

> What I'll do is run a scsi-post-merge-2.6 tree here:
> 
> http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/jejb/scsi-post-merge-2.6.git;a=summary
> 
> I've dropped a quasi stable branch from your quilt tree and plumbed it
> into the -mc tree generation machinery, so it will warn me if you make
> too radical an alteration to your quilt.

So I shouldn't drop the patch from my tree?

confused,

greg k-h