From: "Simon Arlott" <simon@fire.lp0.eu>
To: "Satyam Sharma" <satyam.sharma@gmail.com>
Cc: "James Bottomley" <james.bottomley@steeleye.com>,
"Dave Jones" <davej@redhat.com>,
"Robert P. J. Day" <rpjday@mindspring.com>,
"Linux Kernel Mailing List" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: why does x86 "make defconfig" build a single, lonely module?
Date: Tue, 15 May 2007 12:26:29 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <17841.simon.1179228389@5ec7c279.invalid> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <a781481a0705141741u4c2f442dk76c68f757cadc38d@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, May 15, 2007 01:41, Satyam Sharma wrote:
> On 5/14/07, James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@steeleye.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, 2007-05-14 at 17:53 +0530, Satyam Sharma wrote:
>> > > I guess this is probably the behaviour that James wanted originally?
>>
>> No ... you're still not reading the explanation in the thread:
>>
>> The wait scan module is designed to wait for scans of driver modules.
>> Whether SCSI=y or m has no effect on this ... you can still have modular
>> drivers with built in SCSI.
>
> Ah, I see why we _want_ this built as a _module_ only, and don't even
> want to expose the Kconfig option to the user, lest he screw himself later.
> But dangling "default m"'s or "default y"'s not exposed to the user do
> stand out discomfortingly in Kconfigs, wish there was a better way to
> handle this.
I've already suggested a sysfs attribute - or something equivalent - would
be much better. It's just one function that a user might want to run multiple
times (e.g. after adding scsi devices?) - why should loading a module be used
for this?
--
Simon Arlott
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-05-15 11:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 62+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-05-13 15:22 why does x86 "make defconfig" build a single, lonely module? Robert P. J. Day
2007-05-13 15:58 ` Jan Engelhardt
2007-05-13 16:06 ` Dave Jones
2007-05-13 16:10 ` James Bottomley
2007-05-13 16:18 ` James Bottomley
2007-05-13 16:30 ` Dave Jones
2007-05-14 9:35 ` Satyam Sharma
2007-05-14 9:45 ` Satyam Sharma
2007-05-14 12:00 ` Satyam Sharma
2007-05-14 12:23 ` Satyam Sharma
2007-05-14 14:31 ` James Bottomley
2007-05-15 0:41 ` Satyam Sharma
2007-05-15 11:26 ` Simon Arlott [this message]
2007-05-15 12:02 ` Asynchronous scsi scanning Matthew Wilcox
2007-05-15 16:30 ` Simon Arlott
2007-05-15 17:29 ` Matthew Wilcox
2007-05-15 21:56 ` [PATCH] SCSI: Let users disable SCSI_WAIT_SCAN to be built Stefan Richter
2007-05-16 14:43 ` Stefan Richter
2007-05-17 14:00 ` James Bottomley
2007-05-17 17:02 ` Satyam Sharma
2007-05-15 23:27 ` Asynchronous scsi scanning Satyam Sharma
2007-05-15 23:28 ` Arjan van de Ven
2007-05-15 23:49 ` Satyam Sharma
2007-05-16 2:51 ` Matthew Wilcox
2007-05-16 2:59 ` Roland Dreier
2007-05-17 17:13 ` Satyam Sharma
2007-05-17 17:20 ` Matthew Wilcox
2007-05-17 17:41 ` Satyam Sharma
2007-05-17 18:24 ` Christoph Hellwig
2007-05-17 18:47 ` Satyam Sharma
2007-05-17 18:51 ` Christoph Hellwig
2007-05-17 19:04 ` Satyam Sharma
2007-05-17 19:39 ` Matthew Wilcox
2007-05-17 19:43 ` Benjamin LaHaise
2007-05-17 21:30 ` Matthew Wilcox
2007-05-17 21:42 ` Dave Jones
2007-05-17 22:00 ` Peter Jones
2007-05-18 14:00 ` Stefan Richter
2007-05-18 5:28 ` Satyam Sharma
2007-05-18 11:24 ` Matthew Wilcox
2007-05-18 13:14 ` Satyam Sharma
2007-05-18 3:41 ` Satyam Sharma
2007-05-18 11:19 ` Matthew Wilcox
2007-05-18 13:06 ` Satyam Sharma
2007-05-17 17:32 ` sysfs makes scaling suck " Benjamin LaHaise
2007-05-17 17:45 ` James Bottomley
2007-05-17 17:49 ` Benjamin LaHaise
2007-05-19 16:30 ` Greg KH
2007-05-17 22:24 ` Peter Jones
2007-05-13 16:20 ` why does x86 "make defconfig" build a single, lonely module? Robert P. J. Day
2007-05-13 16:27 ` James Bottomley
2007-05-13 16:37 ` Robert P. J. Day
2007-05-13 17:42 ` Simon Arlott
2007-05-13 17:48 ` James Bottomley
2007-05-13 18:26 ` Simon Arlott
2007-05-13 18:45 ` Dave Jones
2007-05-13 18:45 ` James Bottomley
2007-05-14 17:29 ` Jan Engelhardt
2007-05-14 18:46 ` Alan Cox
2007-05-14 20:06 ` Jan Engelhardt
2007-05-13 16:28 ` Dave Jones
2007-05-13 20:38 ` Simon Arlott
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=17841.simon.1179228389@5ec7c279.invalid \
--to=simon@fire.lp0.eu \
--cc=davej@redhat.com \
--cc=james.bottomley@steeleye.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rpjday@mindspring.com \
--cc=satyam.sharma@gmail.com \
/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