On Mon, Aug 03 2009, John Stoffel wrote: > >>>>> "James" == James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > James> On Mon, 2009-08-03 at 13:52 -0400, John Stoffel wrote: > >> >>>>> "James" == James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > >> > James> It seems I got unsubscribed from linux-scsi last week while I was on > James> holiday and I've likely missed a slew of patches, it seems like an > James> appropriate time to remind everyone how the SCSI trees work. > >> > James> --- > >> > James> There are two git based scsi trees: > >> > James> http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/jejb/scsi-misc-2.6.git > >> > James> called the scsi-misc tree for patches being collected for the > James> next merge window. And > >> > >> I don't see my patch to block/Kconfig to make BLK_DEV_BSG be enabled > >> by default. Is this going to be pushed for 2.6.32-rc1 when the merge > >> window opens up? > >> > >> I've attached the patch, just to make sure. Let me know if I should > >> send it in properly. > >> > >> Thanks! > >> John > >> > >> > >> Make Block Layer SG support v4 the default, since recent udev versions > >> depend on this to access serial numbers and other low level info > >> properly. > >> > >> This should be backported to older kernels as well, since most distros > >> have > >> enabled this for a long time. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: John Stoffel <john@xxxxxxxxxxx> > >> --- > >> block/Kconfig | 11 +++++++---- > >> 1 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > >> > >> diff --git a/block/Kconfig b/block/Kconfig > >> index e7d1278..55bbefc 100644 > >> --- a/block/Kconfig > >> +++ b/block/Kconfig > > James> Actually, this one isn't really SCSI; it's block (Jens cc'd). > > Thanks for the cc to Jens. I'd argue that it is SCSI, since it's > about enbabling the Generic SCSI v4 stuff. But hey, I'd be happy to > see this enabled by default no matter how it goes into the kernel. > > James> It's Jens call on the backport, but my feeling is that removing > James> a feature from experimental is really an enhancement not a bug > James> fix, so it's not really eligible under the backport rules. > > Sure, I can understand this, but since the feature has been around for > quite a while, and since most (as I understand it, but haven't > confirmed) distros enable it by default, I think the risk is low. > > But again, it's not clear to me whether you think A) this should go > into 2.6.32 and B) whether it will go through your tree or if I should > try to push it through Jens. > > I await the discussion. It's really a trivial change, and its makes a > huge difference to people using Udev to manage devices properly. Principally, I completely agree with James assessment that it doesn't meet normal stable rules as such. It's not fixing a bug or oops, it's a feature addition. But since this is rather trivial and bsg has been around for ages (and is on in distro kernels), I'm OK with making an exception in this case. -- Jens Axboe -- 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
