| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 15 May 2007 06:02:28 -0600 From: Matthew Wilcox <matthew@....cx> To: Simon Arlott <simon@...e.lp0.eu> Cc: James Bottomley <james.bottomley@...eleye.com>, Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org, kernel-packagers@...r.kernel.org Subject: Asynchronous scsi scanning On Tue, May 15, 2007 at 12:26:29PM +0100, Simon Arlott wrote: > 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? It's easy to suggest a sysfs attribute. What you've failed to do is suggest the pathname of the sysfs attribute, the contents of it, or the semantics of it (read-only? read-write? write-only? blocking?) My personal favourite would be to add a new verb to /proc/scsi/scsi, but James dislikes that idea. I'd *really* like to hear from distro people. What is the most convenient way for you to implement "load all the scsi modules, then wait until all devices are found"? James and I had thought that loading a new module would be the easiest way for you, but it seems inconvenient for you. - 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