On Wednesday, 06/17/2015 at 07:03 EDT, Martin Schwidefsky <martin.schwidef...@de.ibm.com> wrote: > Well, technically there have been machines with OSA cards that required > the portname which is why the parameter has survived until now. There > is a bit in the response block of the read channel activation ccw that > tells us if the portname is required.
The 9672s were the last machines that required a portname, but perhaps just following the rules dictated by that bit is sufficient. > With the option for 31-bit kernel builds gone from the upstream source > and the fact that the z900/z800 does not require the portname we could > remove the portname code from the OSA driver. > > Uschi, care to create a patch to remove everything portname related from > the OSA driver? Ummm..... I wouldn't do that. I simply want the documentation to disappear and any distro-provided configuration panels to remove it. If someone already has it, accept it, warn that it is being ignored, and ignore it. I don't want failures because someone specifies the portname. And it is still an attribute of the OSA, even if Linux isn't using it. Alan Altmark Senior Managing z/VM and Linux Consultant Lab Services System z Delivery Practice IBM Systems & Technology Group ibm.com/systems/services/labservices office: 607.429.3323 mobile; 607.321.7556 alan_altm...@us.ibm.com IBM Endicott ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@vm.marist.edu with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For more information on Linux on System z, visit http://wiki.linuxvm.org/
