[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <46477763.5020400@simon.arlott.org.uk>
Date:	Sun, 13 May 2007 21:38:59 +0100
From:	Simon Arlott <simon@...e.lp0.eu>
To:	James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...elEye.com>
CC:	Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>,
	"Robert P. J. Day" <rpjday@...dspring.com>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: why does x86 "make defconfig" build a single, lonely module?
On 13/05/07 17:10, James Bottomley wrote:
> On Sun, 2007-05-13 at 12:06 -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
>> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/Kconfig b/drivers/scsi/Kconfig
>> index e62d23f..0f6c370 100644
>> --- a/drivers/scsi/Kconfig
>> +++ b/drivers/scsi/Kconfig
>> @@ -244,7 +244,7 @@ config SCSI_SCAN_ASYNC
>>  config SCSI_WAIT_SCAN
>>  	tristate
>>  	default m
>> -	depends on SCSI
>> +	depends on SCSI_SCAN_ASYNC
> 
> No.  SCSI_SCAN_ASYNC is a bool ... if you depend on it, you'll force the
> wait scan to be built in, which isn't the idea at all.
Try it. It doesn't force it to be built in.
> Plus SCSI_SCAN_ASYNC only sets the *default* for async scanning.  You
> can alter this at boot time, so you could need the wait scan module even
> with it set to N.
static int __init wait_scan_init(void)
{
    scsi_complete_async_scans();
    return 0;
}
Could that not be built-in to SCSI as a sysfs attribute, rather than using 
a module to tell the kernel to do something? It looks like someone might 
want to call scsi_complete_async_scans() more than once too - if they also 
don't allow modules to be unloaded then they can't.
-- 
Simon Arlott
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
 
