On Sun, 2007-03-11 at 22:17 +0100, Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote: > On Sun, 11 Mar 2007, James Bottomley wrote: > > On Sun, 2007-03-11 at 21:56 +0100, Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote: > > > Which means, with this change you cannot build a kernel without module > > > support but with scsi_wait_scan, which was possible before. Don't know if > > > anybody would ever want to do this though... > > > > I'll do something about that if you can tell me how one might use > > scsi_wait_scan without module support in the kernel ... > > I won't:-) Just from the comment at the top of the patch I didn't get the > impression that this indeed was its intended result. Building statically > with scsi_wait_scan would mean that you might allow async scan, but then > some time at late_initcall() time you want a sync point. Could this ever > be desired? If not, just ignore my comment. scsi_wait_scan is designed to be a module that is loaded *after* you've loaded all HBA modules that doesn't return from module_init until the scans previously launched by the HBA module insertions are complete. In a monolithic kernel, this is done by the async scan infrastructure but in a modular kernel, you have to have some signal that you've finished loading the SCSI modules (which is what scsi_wait_scan is). So, if you build a kernel without module support, ipso facto you have no SCSI modules to load and therefore you can't have a use for scsi_wait_scan. James - To unsubscribe from this list: 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
