On Wed, 13 Apr 2005, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
+struct scsi_transport_template *
+qla2x00_alloc_transport_tmpl(void)
+{
+ return (fc_attach_transport(qla2xxx_transport_functions));
+}
I don't see much of a point in this function vs just making
qla2xxx_transport_functions
On Wed, 13 Apr 2005, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
atomic_set(fcport-state, FCS_ONLINE);
+ if (ha-flags.init_done)
+ qla2x00_reg_remote_port(ha, fcport);
}
...
- goto probe_failed;
+ goto probe_alloc_failed;
}
+ pci_set_drvdata(pdev,
On Tue, Apr 19, 2005 at 12:27:51AM -0700, Andrew Vasquez wrote:
why do you still need
the special case for delaying registration of the targets?
Ok, this is actually a concern I have with the current fc_rport
implementation (and yes, I realize I'm a day late) -- the auto-scan
logic
Add initial support for FC remote port infrastructure.
o Use fc_remote_port...() registration and block/unlock
functions.
o Consolidate 'attribute' (fc-remote/sysfs) helpers into
new qla_attr.c file.
Signed-off-by: Andrew Vasquez [EMAIL PROTECTED]
+#include linux/version.h
not needed (this is in qla_attr.c)
+struct scsi_transport_template *
+qla2x00_alloc_transport_tmpl(void)
+{
+ return (fc_attach_transport(qla2xxx_transport_functions));
+}
I don't see much of a point in this function vs just making
qla2xxx_transport_functions
5 matches
Mail list logo
