Mike> Should iser patches have linux-scsi ccd on them in the
Mike> future? And should they go through the scsi maintainer
Mike> normally (I understand they cannot now since James does not
Mike> have all the infinniband bits)? I am really just trying to
Mike> avoid any coordinatation issues that come about by having
Mike> core iscsi and tcp iscsi patched sent to the scsi maintainer
Mike> then having to have iser going through Roland.
Mike> Does srp go from openib-general and Roland then to lkml? For
Mike> iscsi we do not go through net-dev and we live in
Mike> drivers/scsi so maybe we are the odd driver?:) What is the
Mike> proper or normal procedure?
It's a problem because SRP and iSER are straddling both the SCSI and
IB worlds. Probably the best policy is to cc all relevant mailing
lists (at least linux-scsi and openib-general) whenever there's a
doubt about who should see something.
As far as merging patches goes, I've been merging SRP changes directly
to Linus, except for generic fixes to <scsi/srp.h>, which I've been
sending through James. Or felt that iSCSI should be merged through my
tree, but I have no problem if in the future patches bypass my tree.
(But I would like to be cc'ed on changes to IB stuff, especially core
things outside of specific drivers)
(Which all reminds me I have a question about SCSI EH and SRP to send
to the linux-scsi list...)
- R.
-
: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
