Re: [PATCH 8/19]: SCST SYSFS interface implementation

[Boaz Harrosh]

On 11/14/2010 01:59 AM, Greg KH wrote:
> In the end, I guess it really doesn't matter as this code isn't getting
> merged so I shouldn't worry about it, right?
> 

This is not nice and is uncharacteristic of you.

This project, even though out-of-tree, is an old and mature project that
has many users. These are all *Linux* users. The authors and community
have come to us for help, and advice on making this code acceptable for
mainline and hardening the code the way, only one project on the planet
can do, the Linux community. I think it is our courtesy and obligation
to the Linux users of this Project to comment where they are doing wrong
and where they should do better.

It is not of their choice to be out-of-tree. It is ours. The least we can
do. Is give then some assistance if we can, and have 5 minutes of our time.

All these issues we were discussing are interesting and are real Kernel
problems. For instance the last comment you made was that for such a dynamic
system and life time problems, and functionality. A better and expected
solution might be the device tree and not sysfs. And for such big additions
the sysfs maintainer must give his blessings. This is most valuable information
regardless of if we accept their code or not at the end.
(And we better explain ourselves well when we don't)

> thanks,
> 
> greg k-h

Sincerely yours
Boaz
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/