andre@linux-ide.org said:
> The whole reason for my replacement was to add driverfs to IDE and
> remove devfs and ultimately "de-gooch" the kernel. So we are nearly
> 100 patches in and the primary reason for ousting is still a failure,
> NICE!
Well, perhaps we have slightly different agendas. I think driverfs will solve
a whole series of enumeration and mapping problems that occur in the SCSI
mid-layer and which get especially tortuous with Fibre Channel. I also think
it will help us bring the SCSI and IDE views closer together.
I persuaded Linus to put the SCSI driverfs patches in the kernel even though I
knew they touched more than SCSI (the partitions code) and were not as modular
as I would have liked. The reason is that we need to get as much visibility
on this as possible before the code freeze. I'm fully prepared to sort out
any problems with this as they arise (and indeed the panic is already fixed).
I believe it's a variation of a principle attributable to a wise Australian:
get the right solution in, even if not quite the right implementation. That
way, everyone will be extrememly motivated to help produce the right
implementation.
James
-
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/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Jul 07 2002 - 22:00:13 EST