From: "Leubner, Achim" <Achim_Leubner@adaptec.com>
To: "Christoph Hellwig" <hch@lst.de>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: HEADS UP for gdth driver users
Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2006 14:21:00 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <EF6AF37986D67948AD48624A3E5D93AFAA92DF@mtce2k01.adaptec.com> (raw)
Is there any news on that? Can we use the scsi_get/put_command() functions for allocating a "struct scsi_cmnd" or should we allocate it with kmalloc() or somehow like that? Or, Christoph, did you already make the second patch for the gdth driver?
We want to bring the gdth driver up to date as soon as possible. Any help is greatly appreciated!
Thanks,
Achim
=======================
Achim Leubner
Software Engineer / RAID drivers
ICP vortex GmbH / Adaptec Inc.
Phone: +49-351-8718291
-----Original Message-----
From: Leubner, Achim
Sent: Dienstag, 18. April 2006 16:41
To: 'Christoph Hellwig'; linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: RE: HEADS UP for gdth driver users
Hi all,
The patch looks good for 2.6.17-rc1. Christoph, did you already make the second patch for the real switchover?
Will only the scsi_allocate_request()/scsi_do_req()/scsi_release_request() be removed in the next kernel releases? - I'm wondering if I could use the scsi_get_command()/scsi_put_command() functions to get a Scsi_Cmnd struct. and to send it to the gdth_queuecommand()/gdth_next(). I'm willing to make and test the second patch but please give me some hints what functions you plan to kill and what function we can still use.
Thanks & Regards,
Achim
=======================
Achim Leubner
Software Engineer / RAID drivers
ICP vortex GmbH / Adaptec Inc.
Phone: +49-351-8718291
-----Original Message-----
From: Christoph Hellwig [mailto:hch@lst.de]
Sent: Mittwoch, 8. März 2006 14:20
To: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; Leubner, Achim
Subject: HEADS UP for gdth driver users
Hi folks,
the gdth driver is the only driver using (and in this case abusing) the
scsi_request interface we plan to kill for 2.6.17. I've sent a patch
that's a first step to convert the driver away from it a few weeks ago
but didn't get any response. I urgently need testers to keep the driver
for 2.6.17+. Else it'll be marked broken until we get a person to help
testing the changes needed to resurrect it.
next reply other threads:[~2006-04-24 12:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-04-24 12:21 Leubner, Achim [this message]
2006-04-25 10:33 ` Christoph Hellwig
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2006-06-16 9:21 Leubner, Achim
2006-06-09 11:03 Leubner, Achim
2006-06-09 18:33 ` Andrew Morton
2006-06-09 18:34 ` Andrew Morton
2006-06-10 10:03 ` Ingo Oeser
2006-04-25 10:54 Leubner, Achim
2006-04-18 14:41 Leubner, Achim
2006-03-10 11:04 Leubner, Achim
2006-03-08 13:19 Christoph Hellwig
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=EF6AF37986D67948AD48624A3E5D93AFAA92DF@mtce2k01.adaptec.com \
--to=achim_leubner@adaptec.com \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®