so you can disable all SCSI lowlevel drivers at once.
On Tue, Feb 18, 2003 at 02:02:10PM +0100, Marc-Christian Petersen wrote:
> so you can disable all SCSI lowlevel drivers at once.
Why? just disable CONFIG_SCSI instead of adding an artifical option
On Tue, 18 Feb 2003, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 18, 2003 at 02:02:10PM +0100, Marc-Christian Petersen wrote:
> > so you can disable all SCSI lowlevel drivers at once.
>
> Why? just disable CONFIG_SCSI instead of adding an artifical option
Isn't that going to disable all of SCSI? I think the intention may be to
drop hardware drivers and just use ide-scsi, although I might be
misreading the original intent.
There are a fair number of tape/CD/DVD devices out there which you might
run SCSI. I many cases will run SCSI or not at all.
--
bill davidsen <[email protected]>
CTO, TMR Associates, Inc
Doing interesting things with little computers since 1979.
On Tue, 18 Feb 2003, Bill Davidsen wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Feb 2003, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Feb 18, 2003 at 02:02:10PM +0100, Marc-Christian Petersen wrote:
> > > so you can disable all SCSI lowlevel drivers at once.
> >
> > Why? just disable CONFIG_SCSI instead of adding an artifical option
>
> Isn't that going to disable all of SCSI? I think the intention may be to
> drop hardware drivers and just use ide-scsi, although I might be
> misreading the original intent.
>
> There are a fair number of tape/CD/DVD devices out there which you might
> run SCSI. I many cases will run SCSI or not at all.
I thought the intent was to make it unnecessary to run ide-scsi at all.
There was talk about it awhile back on the list. I've been burning CDs
using ide cdrom support for several kernel revisions now.
On Wed, 19 Feb 2003, Thomas Molina wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Feb 2003, Bill Davidsen wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 18 Feb 2003, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> >
> > > On Tue, Feb 18, 2003 at 02:02:10PM +0100, Marc-Christian Petersen wrote:
> > > > so you can disable all SCSI lowlevel drivers at once.
> > >
> > > Why? just disable CONFIG_SCSI instead of adding an artifical option
> >
> > Isn't that going to disable all of SCSI? I think the intention may be to
> > drop hardware drivers and just use ide-scsi, although I might be
> > misreading the original intent.
> >
> > There are a fair number of tape/CD/DVD devices out there which you might
> > run SCSI. I many cases will run SCSI or not at all.
>
> I thought the intent was to make it unnecessary to run ide-scsi at all.
I don't think it matters, the idea is to avoid all the low-level SCSI
menus in one place, without disabling the ability to handle ATAPI devices.
Using the ide-scsi or not still uses SCSI drivers AFAIK.
> There was talk about it awhile back on the list. I've been burning CDs
> using ide cdrom support for several kernel revisions now.
Have you checked/used them? I kind of wrote that off after a while, I
don't need more coasters :-( At the time I deferred testing the score was
CD: read okay burn failed, ide-floppy (ZIP in my case): ng, and tape: not
even visible. That was back around 2.5.52 or so, since ide-scsi seems to
work I haven't been motivated to care.
--
bill davidsen <[email protected]>
CTO, TMR Associates, Inc
Doing interesting things with little computers since 1979.
On Wed, 19 Feb 2003, Bill Davidsen wrote:
> I don't think it matters, the idea is to avoid all the low-level SCSI
> menus in one place, without disabling the ability to handle ATAPI devices.
> Using the ide-scsi or not still uses SCSI drivers AFAIK.
>
> > There was talk about it awhile back on the list. I've been burning CDs
> > using ide cdrom support for several kernel revisions now.
>
> Have you checked/used them? I kind of wrote that off after a while, I
> don't need more coasters :-( At the time I deferred testing the score was
> CD: read okay burn failed, ide-floppy (ZIP in my case): ng, and tape: not
> even visible. That was back around 2.5.52 or so, since ide-scsi seems to
> work I haven't been motivated to care.
As I said, I've been using it successfully. I've not tested ide-floppy
since I don't have one, nor a tape. I would rather not have to use
ide-scsi if I can help it. ide cd support is incompatible with ide-scsi
cdrom support, so things are simpler if I can just cut out the scsi
support entirely.
On Wed, 19 Feb 2003, Thomas Molina wrote:
> On Wed, 19 Feb 2003, Bill Davidsen wrote:
> > Have you checked/used them? I kind of wrote that off after a while, I
> > don't need more coasters :-( At the time I deferred testing the score was
> > CD: read okay burn failed, ide-floppy (ZIP in my case): ng, and tape: not
> > even visible. That was back around 2.5.52 or so, since ide-scsi seems to
> > work I haven't been motivated to care.
>
> As I said, I've been using it successfully. I've not tested ide-floppy
> since I don't have one, nor a tape. I would rather not have to use
> ide-scsi if I can help it. ide cd support is incompatible with ide-scsi
> cdrom support, so things are simpler if I can just cut out the scsi
> support entirely.
Since I have SCSI devices I'd rather make the ATAPI devices look SCSI than
have two sets of tools to do things. And two sets of drivers loaded, two
sources of possible bugs, etc. That just seems simpler to me.
Thanks for the input.
--
bill davidsen <[email protected]>
CTO, TMR Associates, Inc
Doing interesting things with little computers since 1979.
On Wed, Feb 19, 2003 at 08:55:22AM -0500, Bill Davidsen wrote:
> On Wed, 19 Feb 2003, Thomas Molina wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 18 Feb 2003, Bill Davidsen wrote:
> >
> > > On Tue, 18 Feb 2003, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Tue, Feb 18, 2003 at 02:02:10PM +0100, Marc-Christian Petersen wrote:
> > > > > so you can disable all SCSI lowlevel drivers at once.
> > > >
> > > > Why? just disable CONFIG_SCSI instead of adding an artifical option
> > >
> > > Isn't that going to disable all of SCSI? I think the intention may be to
> > > drop hardware drivers and just use ide-scsi, although I might be
> > > misreading the original intent.
> > >
> > > There are a fair number of tape/CD/DVD devices out there which you might
> > > run SCSI. I many cases will run SCSI or not at all.
> >
> > I thought the intent was to make it unnecessary to run ide-scsi at all.
>
> I don't think it matters, the idea is to avoid all the low-level SCSI
> menus in one place, without disabling the ability to handle ATAPI devices.
> Using the ide-scsi or not still uses SCSI drivers AFAIK.
But as far as linux scsi is concerned, ide-scsi is a low-level SCSI driver.
IDE and USB have there own Kconfig options that enable low-level SCSI
driver emulation outside of drivers/scsi, pcmcia does not, and there are
probably other exceptions.
The following is simpler, though I'm not suggesting anything like this be
applied, since we don't have consitency. If all of the low-level scsi
drivers and options were under drivers/scsi, and we could separate
emulated versus real, something like this might be OK:
--- 1.12/drivers/scsi/Kconfig Sun Feb 9 17:29:49 2003
+++ edited/drivers/scsi/Kconfig Wed Feb 19 10:19:11 2003
@@ -170,8 +170,16 @@
logging turned off.
+config SCSI_LOW_LEVEL
+ bool "SCSI low level drivers"
+
+ help
+ enables a list of additional SCSI low level drivers
+
+ If you need one of the drivers here say Y, else say N ;-)
+
menu "SCSI low-level drivers"
- depends on SCSI!=n
+ depends on SCSI!=n && SCSI_LOW_LEVEL!=n
config SGIWD93_SCSI
tristate "SGI WD93C93 SCSI Driver"
-- Patrick Mansfield
On Wed, 19 Feb 2003, Patrick Mansfield wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 19, 2003 at 08:55:22AM -0500, Bill Davidsen wrote:
> > I don't think it matters, the idea is to avoid all the low-level SCSI
> > menus in one place, without disabling the ability to handle ATAPI devices.
> > Using the ide-scsi or not still uses SCSI drivers AFAIK.
>
> But as far as linux scsi is concerned, ide-scsi is a low-level SCSI driver.
>
> IDE and USB have there own Kconfig options that enable low-level SCSI
> driver emulation outside of drivers/scsi, pcmcia does not, and there are
> probably other exceptions.
>
> The following is simpler, though I'm not suggesting anything like this be
> applied, since we don't have consitency. If all of the low-level scsi
> drivers and options were under drivers/scsi, and we could separate
> emulated versus real, something like this might be OK:
I think this is a very good idea. In the long run this is one of those
matrix things, is SCSI on USB an entry in a menu of USB or SCSI? And until
we can access the option from either place and still have exactly one
option, we (someone) must decide which it is.
Clearly unless we do it both way at some time, some portion of the users
will find either choice unintuitive. What you propose is a step forward,
and if extensions are made in 2.7 which suggest rethinking, so be it.
Thanks for the patch, it's goin in my tree.
--
bill davidsen <[email protected]>
CTO, TMR Associates, Inc
Doing interesting things with little computers since 1979.