BTW, while applying this patch to my code, I discovered a missing
component (applied post patch)
@@ -1389,4 +1369,5 @@
setinqstr(cardtype, (void *)
(inq_data.inqd_vid), (sizeof(container_types)/sizeof(char *)));
inq_data.inqd_pdt = INQD_PDT_PROC; /*
Processor device */
+ aac_internal_transfer(scsicmd,
&inq_data, 0, sizeof(inq_data));
scsicmd->result = DID_OK << 16 |
COMMAND_COMPLETE << 8 | SAM_STAT_GOOD;
scsicmd->scsi_done(scsicmd);
Sincerely -- Mark Salyzyn
-----Original Message-----
From: James Bottomley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, August 15, 2005 1:20 PM
To: Salyzyn, Mark
Cc: Mark Haverkamp; linux-scsi
Subject: RE: [PATCH] aacraid 2.6: Fix aacraid probe
breakageinscsi-block-2.6.git
On Mon, 2005-08-15 at 13:06 -0400, Salyzyn, Mark wrote:
> The code does not 'damage' the scsi-misc tree version, so why not
apply
> it to the scsi-misc tree as well at least to make sure it does not
> (extending the test coverage)? What is the scsi-block timetable for
> downstream?
OK, that's true ... there's no reason not to.
> I have almost religiously applied all patches that touch the driver to
> the Adaptec branch here. The net result is I have caught some gaffs
> early on because we always have some test or Q/A program ready to give
> it coverage.
Yes, early and often ... just in case the scsi-block merge gets delayed
again.
James
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
