On Sun, 25 Jun 2000, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 25 2000, Paolo Zeppegno wrote:
> > Rereading my posting I understand I did not make myself clear.
> >
> > What I'm saying is that to be able to use ide-scsi with 2.4 it MUST be
> > compiled in, whereas in 2.2 it worked fine as a module. I'm not talking
> > about the difference in name (ide-scsi vs. scsi).
> >
> > If you look at the source code in ide.c in 2.4 test2:
> >
> > case -14: /* "scsi" */
> > #if defined(CONFIG_BLK_DEV_IDESCSI) && defined(CONFIG_SCSI)
> > drive->scsi = 1;
> > goto done;
> > #else
> > drive->scsi = 0;
> > goto bad_option;
> > #endif /* defined(CONFIG_BLK_DEV_IDESCSI) && defined(CONFIG_SCSI) */
>
> Ah right, could you apply the obvious (remove the #if defined as requried)
> and verify that it then works as expected?
>
> Andre, lets remove that. It makes sense to be able to skip a drive and
> let ide-scsi claim it, also for a modular setup.
You have to have SCSI first to make IDE->SCSI work.
Don't ask me you get to fly on this one alone to Linus.
The possible breakages the would/could result are unknown, since Gadi
placed it there for a reason in the past and it is used further down in
ide.c I worry........ Regardless if you skip the option of
ide-cd/floppy/tape and include ide-scsi a configure it is a non-issue,
IMHO.
Cheers,
Andre Hedrick
The Linux ATA/IDE guy
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Jun 26 2000 - 21:00:08 EST