Re: [PATCH 13/16] gdth: Make one abuse of scsi_cmnd less obvious

2007-10-01 Thread Jeff Garzik
Boaz Harrosh wrote: - Christoph or Jeff will work on the finish up of the BUS hotplug API. I have looked at code examples elsewhere in the kernel, and Jeff's master plan sounds very good. But I would hope not to do it myself as it will take me much longer. Jeff it sounds like you have i

Re: [PATCH 13/16] gdth: Make one abuse of scsi_cmnd less obvious

2007-10-01 Thread Boaz Harrosh
On Mon, Oct 01 2007 at 1:21 +0200, Matthew Wilcox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sun, Sep 30, 2007 at 10:28:13PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote: >> I think it would be better if your whole patch series goes ontop of >> willy's ->done removal series instead. I really hope we can get that >> one in

Re: [PATCH 13/16] gdth: Make one abuse of scsi_cmnd less obvious

2007-09-30 Thread Matthew Wilcox
On Sun, Sep 30, 2007 at 10:28:13PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > I think it would be better if your whole patch series goes ontop of > willy's ->done removal series instead. I really hope we can get that > one into scsi-misc ASAP. Actually, I think if Boaz simply flips this patch to be after

Re: [PATCH 13/16] gdth: Make one abuse of scsi_cmnd less obvious

2007-09-30 Thread Christoph Hellwig
On Sun, Sep 30, 2007 at 10:13:27PM +0200, Boaz Harrosh wrote: > > Rather than having internal commands abuse scsi_done to call > gdth_scsi_done, have all the places that use to call scsi_done directly > call gdth_scsi_done, which now checks whether the command was internal, > and calls scs

[PATCH 13/16] gdth: Make one abuse of scsi_cmnd less obvious

2007-09-30 Thread Boaz Harrosh
Rather than having internal commands abuse scsi_done to call gdth_scsi_done, have all the places that use to call scsi_done directly call gdth_scsi_done, which now checks whether the command was internal, and calls scsi_done if not. Signed-off-by: Matthew Wilcox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Signed