Re: megaraid driver (proposed patch)

2005-03-31 Thread Christoph Hellwig
> - tg3 and bcm5700 totally overlap bcm5700 isn't in the tree. > - the same for e100 and eepro100, e1000 and eepro1000 there's no eepro1000 > - sata drivers ahci and ata_piix used to overlap too on a cople of > devices > - b44 and bcm4400 totally overlap bcm4000 isn't in the tree - To unsub

Re: megaraid driver (proposed patch)

2005-03-31 Thread Thierry Vignaud
James Bottomley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > Would you consider to apply the following patch proposed by > > > > Thierry Vignaud as a solution for the MandrakeSoft kernel in > > > > the mainstream 2.6 kernel ? > > > > > > Well, to be considered you'd need to cc the megaraid maintainers > >

Re: megaraid driver (proposed patch)

2005-03-25 Thread Bruno Cornec
Hello, After a first attempt of discussion on lkml, I'd like to get your feedback on the following points. I've noticed that since recent kernel versions, it's not possible anymore to use simultaneously new and old megaraid driver. It seems to have been introduced by that changeset: http://linux

Re: megaraid driver (proposed patch)

2005-03-25 Thread James Bottomley
On Fri, 2005-03-25 at 19:07 +, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > The new megaraid driver doesn't support old hardware. Maybe we should > drop the overlapping pci ids from the old driver? That works for me too ... but the people who get to decide what to do should be the driver maintainers. James

Re: megaraid driver (proposed patch)

2005-03-25 Thread Ricardo Colon
Can someone please remove me from these mailing lists? I don't remember signing up ffor them and it's filling my inbox too quickly. On Fri, 25 Mar 2005, Christoph Hellwig wrote: On Fri, Mar 25, 2005 at 01:04:37PM -0600, James Bottomley wrote: You get a kernel with two drivers trying to claim some o

Re: megaraid driver (proposed patch)

2005-03-25 Thread Christoph Hellwig
On Fri, Mar 25, 2005 at 01:04:37PM -0600, James Bottomley wrote: > You get a kernel with two drivers trying to claim some of the same set > of cards. The winner will be the driver that gets its init routines > called first, but this isn't a desirable outcome. > > I wouldn't object to a patch that

Re: megaraid driver (proposed patch)

2005-03-25 Thread James Bottomley
On Fri, 2005-03-25 at 18:47 +, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Fri, Mar 25, 2005 at 12:39:52PM -0600, James Bottomley wrote: > > On Fri, 2005-03-25 at 19:22 +0100, Bruno Cornec wrote: > > > Would you consider to apply the following patch proposed by Thierry > > > Vignaud as a solution for the Man

Re: megaraid driver (proposed patch)

2005-03-25 Thread Christoph Hellwig
On Fri, Mar 25, 2005 at 12:39:52PM -0600, James Bottomley wrote: > On Fri, 2005-03-25 at 19:22 +0100, Bruno Cornec wrote: > > Would you consider to apply the following patch proposed by Thierry > > Vignaud as a solution for the MandrakeSoft kernel in the mainstream 2.6 > > kernel ? > > Well, to b

Re: megaraid driver (proposed patch)

2005-03-25 Thread James Bottomley
On Fri, 2005-03-25 at 19:22 +0100, Bruno Cornec wrote: > Would you consider to apply the following patch proposed by Thierry > Vignaud as a solution for the MandrakeSoft kernel in the mainstream 2.6 > kernel ? Well, to be considered you'd need to cc the megaraid maintainers and the linux-scsi mai

megaraid driver (proposed patch)

2005-03-25 Thread Bruno Cornec
Hello, I've noticed that since recent kernel versions, it's not possible anymore to use simultaneously new and old megaraid driver. It seems to have been introduced by that changeset: http://linux.bkbits.net:8080/linux-2.5/diffs/drivers/scsi/megaraid/[EMAIL PROTECTED]|src/.|src/drivers|src/driv