On 07/17/2009 12:45 PM, James Bottomley wrote:
> On Fri, 2009-07-17 at 10:14 -0400, Peter Jones wrote:
>> On 07/17/2009 12:19 AM, James Bottomley wrote:
>>> On Thu, 2009-07-16 at 18:01 -0700, Chandra Seetharaman wrote:
>>>> On Thu, 2009-07-16 at 01:16 +0000, James Bottomley wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, 2009-07-15 at 13:33 -0700, Chandra Seetharaman wrote:
>>>>>> James,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Please let us know which way you want us to proceed ?
>>>>> Yes, propose a mechanism that keeps manual binding but allows the dm-mp
>>>>> user an exception.
>>>> James, this is the current behavior. We wanted to make the binding
>>>> automatic, hence the patches.
>>> OK, well then no ... I'm not breaking an unknown number of enterprise
>>> configurations by forcing a binding where none is wanted or needed.
>>> Find a way to do what you want while not breaking anyone else.
>> And what about the patch I sent you that makes the uevent modalias
>> change depend on a config option? You've still not commented on it.
>
> A config option isn't right, but a runtime one might be if nothing else
> comes along, I suppose. The uevent modalias still needs to go via
> multiple binding.
Please read the patch. It provides a runtime option, and the config
option is used to specify the default setting.
--
Peter
--
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
