From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261365AbVGCFdW (ORCPT ); Sun, 3 Jul 2005 01:33:22 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261368AbVGCFdW (ORCPT ); Sun, 3 Jul 2005 01:33:22 -0400 Received: from smtpout4.uol.com.br ([200.221.4.195]:14470 "EHLO smtp.uol.com.br") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261365AbVGCFdQ (ORCPT ); Sun, 3 Jul 2005 01:33:16 -0400 Date: Sun, 3 Jul 2005 02:33:04 -0300 From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Rog=E9rio?= Brito To: Stefan Richter Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux1394-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, Andrew Morton Subject: Re: Firewire/SBP2 and the -mm tree Message-ID: <20050703053304.GA815@ime.usp.br> Mail-Followup-To: Stefan Richter , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux1394-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, Andrew Morton References: <20050701044018.281b1ebd.akpm@osdl.org> <200507020005.04947.rjw@sisk.pl> <20050702031955.GC28251@ime.usp.br> <42C664CE.9020009@s5r6.in-berlin.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <42C664CE.9020009@s5r6.in-berlin.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi, Stefan. Sorry for the late reply, but I am about to be submitted to a surgery and had to make some health tests, which prevented me from trying to debug things regarding this problem. On Jul 02 2005, Stefan Richter wrote: > That is what usually happens. But the sbp2 related diffs between 2.6.13 > and linux1394 are not an update by linux1394 but rather a rewrite by the > scsi folk. Ok, I see. > Unfortunately, that rewrite was not tested by the linux1394 team. (And > was therefore not checked in at svn.linux1394.org. Lack of manpower was > one factor.) So, applying the sbp2 portion of your diff is a back-out, > not an update. Well, it surely looked like an update, since the revision number of the svn repo was higher than what is in the kernel right now. But that's from the standpoint from a luser (me). > I have a question: Do you need _both_ the sbp2 back-out and ieee1394's > disable_irm parameter, or only one of them? With 2.6.13-rc1, I just need the sbp2.[ch] files patched from trunk and everything works fine (that is, BTW, what I am using right now). But with the recently released 2.6.13-rc1-mm1, patching the sbp2.[ch] files isn't sufficient anymore (i.e., I get results similar to what I had when I first started this thread). I have not yet had time to pass the disable_irm parameter to a -rc1-mm1 kernel (patched or not), but will do (or anything else, if you guys want me to) so that we can have Linus's kernel 2.6.13 working as 2.6.12 did (but with the nice improvements to other subsystems also). :-) Thank you very much, Rogério. -- Rogério Brito : rbrito@ime.usp.br : http://www.ime.usp.br/~rbrito Homepage of the algorithms package : http://algorithms.berlios.de Homepage on freshmeat: http://freshmeat.net/projects/algorithms/