Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757735AbXEQTEx (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 May 2007 15:04:53 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1756610AbXEQTEp (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 May 2007 15:04:45 -0400 Received: from ik-out-1112.google.com ([66.249.90.180]:2143 "EHLO ik-out-1112.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756511AbXEQTEo (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 May 2007 15:04:44 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=gD781PFOneaweKsPtHpU958p2JIuNie8v27C9ANikEdEwQFC2JvBxsVxxMcSkSONVL17cfDjWXPmNRH8CzURJwYOLqF/Y7n/FXL4sEVYEpHr5f+44vKuJoyXFSPF7+XFs1lB9h29bdL8+yNH9e/Hl2dnYfDx8hza8K/gdDXuGGE= Message-ID: Date: Fri, 18 May 2007 00:34:40 +0530 From: "Satyam Sharma" To: "Christoph Hellwig" , "Benjamin LaHaise" , "Matthew Wilcox" , "Simon Arlott" , "James Bottomley" , "Dave Jones" , "Linux Kernel Mailing List" , linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, kernel-packagers@vger.kernel.org, "Robert P. J. Day" Subject: Re: Asynchronous scsi scanning In-Reply-To: <20070517185115.GA13207@infradead.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <20070515120228.GI10562@parisc-linux.org> <20070515172905.GJ10562@parisc-linux.org> <20070516025121.GK10562@parisc-linux.org> <20070517172023.GL10562@parisc-linux.org> <20070517182414.GA12170@infradead.org> <20070517185115.GA13207@infradead.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1066 Lines: 24 On 5/18/07, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Fri, May 18, 2007 at 12:17:40AM +0530, Satyam Sharma wrote: > > However, Ben does have a point that we shouldn't force those > > using SCSI (and wishing to use the new async scanning > > feature) to depend on and use sysfs too > > yes, we do. an no, procfs is a much worse filesystem to depend > on for drivers. By depend on I meant being forced to build and run it. /proc is clearly more-or-less standard that almost everybody uses, otoh users that do not run sysfs are more common. > if people don't want sysfs they can either do the synchronous scan > or do their own scan in userspace. Hmmm, actually those other users could easily write and maintain a 20-line patch that does the wait for async scans thing for them using /proc/scsi/scsi in any case. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/