[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <17841.simon.1179228389@5ec7c279.invalid>
Date: Tue, 15 May 2007 12:26:29 +0100
From: "Simon Arlott" <simon@...e.lp0.eu>
To: "Satyam Sharma" <satyam.sharma@...il.com>
Cc: "James Bottomley" <james.bottomley@...eleye.com>,
"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 Tue, May 15, 2007 01:41, Satyam Sharma wrote:
> On 5/14/07, James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...eleye.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, 2007-05-14 at 17:53 +0530, Satyam Sharma wrote:
>> > > I guess this is probably the behaviour that James wanted originally?
>>
>> No ... you're still not reading the explanation in the thread:
>>
>> The wait scan module is designed to wait for scans of driver modules.
>> Whether SCSI=y or m has no effect on this ... you can still have modular
>> drivers with built in SCSI.
>
> Ah, I see why we _want_ this built as a _module_ only, and don't even
> want to expose the Kconfig option to the user, lest he screw himself later.
> But dangling "default m"'s or "default y"'s not exposed to the user do
> stand out discomfortingly in Kconfigs, wish there was a better way to
> handle this.
I've already suggested a sysfs attribute - or something equivalent - would
be much better. It's just one function that a user might want to run multiple
times (e.g. after adding scsi devices?) - why should loading a module be used
for this?
--
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