On Fri, 2014-06-13 at 18:41 +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 08:21:01AM -0700, James Bottomley wrote: > > We've been ineffectively trying to split them between target and > > initiator, since it's effectively both. Now that we seem to have a > > workable process, why don't we just take everything (target scsi-queue > > and vhost) through the SCSI tree, that way we don't get into these > > problems in future. > > virtio-scsi has nothing to do with the target. I also think sending > target updates through the scsi tree doesn't seem very useful, as there's > is no shared code to start with. Yes, there is, that's where we get the conflicts. The target tree updates the current SCSI drivers with target pieces. It's hard to separate them out because there's usually some target tree dependency. 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
