Hi all:
What are the status of the cdrom patches for 2.4 series?
Namely the dvd patches which are dropped while in the
27-rc era, and the cd-mrw patch which never had a chance
trying to go in to 2.4. Jens? Mancelo?
Regards,
Ozkan Sezer
On Wed, Nov 24, 2004 at 01:11:13AM +0200, O.Sezer wrote:
> Hi all:
>
> What are the status of the cdrom patches for 2.4 series?
> Namely the dvd patches which are dropped while in the
> 27-rc era, and the cd-mrw patch which never had a chance
> trying to go in to 2.4. Jens? Mancelo?
There were problems with the DVD-RW patches so I reverted them.
Jens, what do you think?
No idea about the cd-mrw ones.
On Wed, Nov 24 2004, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 24, 2004 at 01:11:13AM +0200, O.Sezer wrote:
> > Hi all:
> >
> > What are the status of the cdrom patches for 2.4 series?
> > Namely the dvd patches which are dropped while in the
> > 27-rc era, and the cd-mrw patch which never had a chance
> > trying to go in to 2.4. Jens? Mancelo?
>
> There were problems with the DVD-RW patches so I reverted them.
>
> Jens, what do you think?
I don't think it's worth the bother, the support is in 2.6. And I don't
want to maintain new atapi stuff for 2.4. Pat used to care about the
patches, but as he is no longer with Iomega I don't think there's anyone
to look after it.
--
Jens Axboe
Jens Axboe wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 24 2004, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
>
>>On Wed, Nov 24, 2004 at 01:11:13AM +0200, O.Sezer wrote:
>>
>>>Hi all:
>>>
>>>What are the status of the cdrom patches for 2.4 series?
>>>Namely the dvd patches which are dropped while in the
>>>27-rc era, and the cd-mrw patch which never had a chance
>>>trying to go in to 2.4. Jens? Mancelo?
>>
>>There were problems with the DVD-RW patches so I reverted them.
Yup. Pat then posted a patch which supposedly fixed it by placing
something like
else if (CDROM_CAN(CDC_DVD_RAM))
ret = 0;
in cdrom_open_write():
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?t=109156838400001&r=1&w=2
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-scsi&m=109156820507518&w=2
Jens' MRW patch also introduces a new function: cdrom_dvdram_open_write
(which, in turn, calls cdrom_media_erasable), CDROM_CAN(CDC_DVD_RAM)
check in cdrom_open_write() is assigned to it; which again is supposed
to fix it.
>>Jens, what do you think?
>
>
> I don't think it's worth the bother, the support is in 2.6. And I don't
> want to maintain new atapi stuff for 2.4. Pat used to care about the
> patches, but as he is no longer with Iomega I don't think there's anyone
> to look after it.
Which is truly a pity. Yes I can understand that a maintainer needs
to concentrate on new trees etc, but it's pity. Especially hearing
the pre-recorded "Hey 2.6 already has it, upgrade to it" message is
always nice ;)
Ozkan Sezer
On Wed, Nov 24 2004, O.Sezer wrote:
> Jens Axboe wrote:
> >You conveniently ignore that 2.4 is in bug fix mode, and a strict one
> >now even. And then you want to add new features to a driver that is both
> >used on almost every machine and also drives the most picky and buggy
> >hardware out there? So please can the 'pre-recorded' message crap. You
> >are not the one that will have to pick up the pieces if something
> >breaks.
>
> My sincere apologies if I offended.
No worries. You seem to be capable of adding it yourself, so I don't see
why it's such a huge deal that 2.4-vanilla has to include it?
--
Jens Axboe
Jens Axboe wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 24 2004, O.Sezer wrote:
>
>>Jens Axboe wrote:
>>
>>>You conveniently ignore that 2.4 is in bug fix mode, and a strict one
>>>now even. And then you want to add new features to a driver that is both
>>>used on almost every machine and also drives the most picky and buggy
>>>hardware out there? So please can the 'pre-recorded' message crap. You
>>>are not the one that will have to pick up the pieces if something
>>>breaks.
>>
>>My sincere apologies if I offended.
>
>
> No worries. You seem to be capable of adding it yourself, so I don't see
Yup.
> why it's such a huge deal that 2.4-vanilla has to include it?
>
It already had an attempt of merging while in 2.4.27 cycle, which isn't
so far, and only because of that I asked why you don't give it another
try. But yes, no worries.
Ozkan Sezer
On Wed, Nov 24 2004, O.Sezer wrote:
> Jens Axboe wrote:
> >On Wed, Nov 24 2004, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
> >
> >>On Wed, Nov 24, 2004 at 01:11:13AM +0200, O.Sezer wrote:
> >>
> >>>Hi all:
> >>>
> >>>What are the status of the cdrom patches for 2.4 series?
> >>>Namely the dvd patches which are dropped while in the
> >>>27-rc era, and the cd-mrw patch which never had a chance
> >>>trying to go in to 2.4. Jens? Mancelo?
> >>
> >>There were problems with the DVD-RW patches so I reverted them.
>
> Yup. Pat then posted a patch which supposedly fixed it by placing
> something like
> else if (CDROM_CAN(CDC_DVD_RAM))
> ret = 0;
> in cdrom_open_write():
> http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?t=109156838400001&r=1&w=2
> http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-scsi&m=109156820507518&w=2
>
> Jens' MRW patch also introduces a new function: cdrom_dvdram_open_write
> (which, in turn, calls cdrom_media_erasable), CDROM_CAN(CDC_DVD_RAM)
> check in cdrom_open_write() is assigned to it; which again is supposed
> to fix it.
Fix that issue. More might crop up.
> >>Jens, what do you think?
> >
> >
> >I don't think it's worth the bother, the support is in 2.6. And I don't
> >want to maintain new atapi stuff for 2.4. Pat used to care about the
> >patches, but as he is no longer with Iomega I don't think there's anyone
> >to look after it.
>
> Which is truly a pity. Yes I can understand that a maintainer needs
> to concentrate on new trees etc, but it's pity. Especially hearing
> the pre-recorded "Hey 2.6 already has it, upgrade to it" message is
> always nice ;)
You conveniently ignore that 2.4 is in bug fix mode, and a strict one
now even. And then you want to add new features to a driver that is both
used on almost every machine and also drives the most picky and buggy
hardware out there? So please can the 'pre-recorded' message crap. You
are not the one that will have to pick up the pieces if something
breaks.
--
Jens Axboe
Jens Axboe wrote:
> You conveniently ignore that 2.4 is in bug fix mode, and a strict one
> now even. And then you want to add new features to a driver that is both
> used on almost every machine and also drives the most picky and buggy
> hardware out there? So please can the 'pre-recorded' message crap. You
> are not the one that will have to pick up the pieces if something
> breaks.
My sincere apologies if I offended.
Ozkan Sezer
On Wed, Nov 24 2004, O.Sezer wrote:
> >why it's such a huge deal that 2.4-vanilla has to include it?
> >
>
> It already had an attempt of merging while in 2.4.27 cycle, which isn't
> so far, and only because of that I asked why you don't give it another
> try. But yes, no worries.
Yes, and that was probably a mistake, at least I'm glad we pulled it. If
you post a patch fo 2.4.28 with the fixes, I'm sure other people will be
happy to test it as well :-)
--
Jens Axboe