From: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@steeleye.com>
To: "Mukker, Atul" <Atulm@lsil.com>
Cc: "'Arjan van de Ven'" <arjanv@redhat.com>,
"'Paul Wagland'" <paul@wagland.net>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@debian.org>,
"Bagalkote, Sreenivas" <sreenib@lsil.com>,
"'linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org'" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"'linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org'" <linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH][BUGFIX] : megaraid patch for 2.10.1 (irq disable bug fix)
Date: 24 Feb 2004 10:47:11 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1077641233.1804.145.camel@mulgrave> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <0E3FA95632D6D047BA649F95DAB60E57033BC3DA@exa-atlanta.se.lsil.com>
On Tue, 2004-02-24 at 10:04, Mukker, Atul wrote:
> Wow! That's a lot of no-no. But we'll let the code speak for itself. The
> major driving force behind the unified design is support for MPT raid
> controllers and also a single code base, with a very small footprint patch -
> if at all required, to support various kernels.
I didn't say "no". I'm just warning you that you've chosen a hard road
to hoe, particularly with the limited life of 2.4.
> In this driver, the base kernel is assumed to be a lk 2.6.x with appropriate
> APIs added for lk 2.4.x.
>
> I recommend reading the concise design document, mraid_hotplug.doc, which
> explains the overall layout of the driver and some design concerns. This
> document is part of the driver package.
OK, I read it.
This is worrying:
"Even though the use of pure hotplug APIs is very appealing, I want to
propose
some deviation from this approach. If drivers rely on the PCI framework
to
discover adapters, we lose flexibility of registering controllers in a
particular order with the operating system."
Anything relying on discovery ordering in 2.6 is broken.
And so is this:
"An important MegaRAID feature is to be able to boot from any logical
drive on
any controller. Since persistent device naming is not prevalent in Linux
world
as of this writing, the order in which the devices are discovered is
very
important. We would like to continue to give users flexibility to
designate
any logical drive on any controller as the boot drive. As long as the
BIOS on
this controller is enabled, and only on this one :-), the chosen disk
would be
exported to the OS before any other disk."
If you require this functionality in 2.6, you should look at plugging
into the udev infrastructure.
> Obviously we are open to all suggestions and ready to modify the code if
> there is a general feeling in that direction. Also, this driver would
> required to sit in a directory because of a split in files
Well, I cast a brief glance over it, the #ifdef structure is horrible
(and basically a product of trying to support 2.4).
This is unacceptable:
#if defined (__x86_64__)
/*
* Register the 32-bit ioctl conversion
*/
register_ioctl32_conversion(MEGAIOCCMD, sys_ioctl)
#endif
The best thing to do would be to design the API to be 32/64 agnostic,
but if you can't do that, at least use the CONFIG_COMPAT infrastructure
that already exists.
James
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-02-24 16:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-02-24 16:04 [PATCH][BUGFIX] : megaraid patch for 2.10.1 (irq disable bug fix) Mukker, Atul
2004-02-24 16:47 ` James Bottomley [this message]
2004-02-24 20:43 ` Christoph Hellwig
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2004-02-24 21:02 Mukker, Atul
2004-02-24 21:14 ` Arjan van de Ven
2004-02-24 14:47 Mukker, Atul
2004-02-24 14:58 ` Matthew Wilcox
2004-02-24 15:06 ` James Bottomley
2004-02-24 20:33 ` Matt Domsch
2004-02-23 17:24 Bagalkote, Sreenivas
2004-02-23 17:29 ` Matthew Wilcox
2004-02-24 7:09 ` Paul Wagland
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1077641233.1804.145.camel@mulgrave \
--to=james.bottomley@steeleye.com \
--cc=Atulm@lsil.com \
--cc=arjanv@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=paul@wagland.net \
--cc=sreenib@lsil.com \
--cc=willy@debian.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox