[<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