From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Matthew Wilcox Subject: Re: I have modified the megaraid driver v2.00.5 from kernel 2.6 t o 2 .4.22-prex-ac1 Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2003 14:47:54 +0100 Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org Message-ID: <20030724134754.GG1485@parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk> References: <20030724114156.GC1485@parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk> <200307241309.h6OD9dg06659@devserv.devel.redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk ([195.92.249.252]:63936 "EHLO www.linux.org.uk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S265531AbTGXNcu (ORCPT ); Thu, 24 Jul 2003 09:32:50 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200307241309.h6OD9dg06659@devserv.devel.redhat.com> List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: Alan Cox Cc: Matthew Wilcox , Tomita Haruo , atulm@lsil.com, Matt Domsch , linux-megaraid-devel@dell.com, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, Tomita Haruo On Thu, Jul 24, 2003 at 09:09:39AM -0400, Alan Cox wrote: > > No, not at all. I'm criticising the original code here, not your patch. > > In my opinion, we should simply delete these lines: > > That would be a bad idea. Some of the devices share the same non subsys id > with non megaraid cards (INTEL I960) and the result is that megaraid cards > fall out with some other stuff. Then the comment needs to be fixed -- we shouldn't be rejecting cards for non-PCI-200X compliance; we should be rejecting them because another driver wants them. Yuck. -- "It's not Hollywood. War is real, war is primarily not about defeat or victory, it is about death. I've seen thousands and thousands of dead bodies. Do you think I want to have an academic debate on this subject?" -- Robert Fisk