From: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@steeleye.com>
To: Steven Dake <sdake@mvista.com>
Cc: torvalds@transmeta.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] SCSI and FibreChannel Hotswap for linux 2.5.44-bk2
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2002 15:42:21 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200210302042.g9UKgLS02419@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: Message from Steven Dake <sdake@mvista.com> of "Wed, 30 Oct 2002 11:54:47 MST." <3DC02AF7.6020209@mvista.com>
sdake@mvista.com said:
> This patch has been reviewed by Alan Cox, Greg KH, Christoph Hellwig,
> Patrick Mansfield, Rob Landly, Jeff Garzik, Scott Murray, James
> Bottomley, Mike Anderson, Randy Dunlap and Patrick Mochel.
Well, I reviewed it but my though was that it should be built on the emerging
hotplug infrastructure.
I'm currently trying to move things like this into the user layer, so from a
design principle I don't want to have 90% using the user space stuff and 10%
using its in-kernel equivalent because that means we have two mechanisms to
maintain, thus doubling the work.
The problem you had with this was the 10ms requirement from removal
notification to removal completion. Several people have already suggested
that if that really is a hard and fast requirement, then you could simply
treat the removal as a surprise removal rather than a planned one and work on
fixing our surprise removal problems instead.
The bottom line is that I'm not convinced this can't be done using the
existing infrastructure or a generic enhancement to it.
James
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-10-30 20:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-10-30 18:54 [PATCH] SCSI and FibreChannel Hotswap for linux 2.5.44-bk2 Steven Dake
2002-10-30 19:45 ` Alan Cox
2002-10-30 19:29 ` Linus Torvalds
2002-10-30 21:17 ` Doug Ledford
2002-10-30 20:31 ` Scott Murray
2002-10-30 20:18 ` Christoph Hellwig
2002-10-30 21:09 ` Steven Dake
2002-10-30 20:42 ` James Bottomley [this message]
2002-11-04 2:13 ` Rob Landley
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2002-10-30 20:50 Adam J. Richter
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=200210302042.g9UKgLS02419@localhost.localdomain \
--to=james.bottomley@steeleye.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sdake@mvista.com \
--cc=torvalds@transmeta.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