On Wed, 26 Sep 2007 20:52:43 -0400 Konrad Rzeszutek wrote: > > > +config ISCSI_IBFT > > > + tristate "iSCSI Boot Firmware Table Attributes" > > > + depends on X86 > > > > why only on X86? > > PowerPC exports this data via the OpenFirmware so it already shows in > the /sysfs entries. I was thinking to combine those sysfs entries under this > code, but that is something in the future. > > In regards to all other platforms, I figured I would only make it supported > under platforms that have been tested. Is there anything that stops this from > working for example of IA64? Well no. The hardware that supports the iBFT is > either in the BIOS or in NICs - so the SGI or HP boxes _should_ work, however > I am not comfortable to make it supported unless I've tested it.
That's not how Linux development works. You (we) have a huge test lab around the world. You practice "release early, release often" and get testing/feedback on it. Maybe even patches. :) > > Need blank line here... except why is this function in the header > > Fixed blank line. > > file? and why is it inline? > > Q: "Why is this function in the header file" > If the find_ibft() was to be implemented in firmware/iscsi_ibft.c code the > firmware-driver couldn't be compiled as a module (or rather it could, but > when the vmlinuz was to be linked it would complain about missing symbol - > find_ibft). I was thinking to let the user give the choice whether they want > to load this firmware driver or have it built-in the kernel. > > Q:"Why is it inline" > Uhh. It does not need to. I will remove the 'inline' part. But we strongly prefer not to have non-inline C code in header files, [and the function does not need to be inline] so find_ibft() needs a home in some source file/code that won't be built as a loadable module, right? And preferably not duplicated (i386 & x86_64 versions; but we should see a merged x86/ arch soon, so it sounds). Would ia64 have its own version of find_ibft() or use this same code? I think that for now you can put find_ibft() in both setup.c files and the merged x86/ arch tree can eliminate one of them. On looking back at the patch, why aren't the ibft_phys and find_ibft() parts of both setup.c patches surrounded by #ifdef CONFIG_ISCSI_IBFT & #endif ? --- ~Randy Phaedrus says that Quality is about caring. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
