On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 03:21:26PM +0000, James Bottomley wrote: > On Wed, 2009-06-17 at 12:07 +0200, Stefan Richter wrote: > > People keep sending patches to expose CONFIG_SCSI_WAIT_SCAN as a tunable > > item. These patches aren't accepted upstream, so let's stop the ongoing > > irritation of people due to this obscure and strange installed module > > and its Kconfig option. > > > > Signed-off-by: Stefan Richter <stefanr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > drivers/scsi/Kconfig | 17 ++++++++++++++++- > > 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > Index: b/drivers/scsi/Kconfig > > =================================================================== > > --- a/drivers/scsi/Kconfig > > +++ b/drivers/scsi/Kconfig > > @@ -259,10 +259,25 @@ config SCSI_SCAN_ASYNC > > or async on the kernel's command line. > > > > config SCSI_WAIT_SCAN > > - tristate > > + tristate # No prompt here, this is a hidden option. > > Adding comments explaining this is good, I think. > > > default m > > depends on SCSI > > depends on MODULES > > + help > > + Wait until all the async scans are complete. The idea is to use > > + it in initrd/ initramfs scripts. You modprobe it after all the > > + modprobes of the root SCSI drivers and it will wait until they > > + have all finished scanning their buses before allowing the boot > > + to proceed. > > + > > + Of course this does not work if targets boot independently of and > > + in parallel with the initiator, and/ or with transports with non- > > + deterministic target discovery schemes, and/ or if a transport > > + driver does not support scsi_wait_scan. > > + > > + Still, this option is not exposed as a prompt because little is > > + to be gained by disabling it, whereas people who accidentally > > + switch it off may wonder why their mkinitrd gets into trouble. > > But not a help text that can never be shown. Turn this into a comment > and I'll apply the patch. > > The reason is the fact that this could be construed as a detectable bug > (option with help that can never be displayed) and someone with too much > time on their hands someday might make a static checker for it. In another thread we discussed that the help text should be visible when searching for an invisible symbol. There are arguments both ways. Personally I like the help syntax that we one day can benefit from and would not accept a warning for help text on symbols with no prompt. Sam -- 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
