Dear Pavel Herrmann,
On Thursday 20 of September 2012 22:05:36 Marek Vasut wrote:
Dear Pavel Herrmann,
This core provides unified access to different block controllers (SATA, SCSI).
Description of the patch missing or is sub-par. You should work on this skill.
Signed-off-by: Pavel Herrmann morpheus.ibis@gmail.com
Makefile | 1 + drivers/blockctrl/Makefile | 42 ++++++ drivers/blockctrl/core.c | 349
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ include/dm/blockctrl.h |
75 ++++++++++ 4 files changed, 467 insertions(+) create mode 100644 drivers/blockctrl/Makefile create mode 100644 drivers/blockctrl/core.c create mode 100644 include/dm/blockctrl.h
diff --git a/Makefile b/Makefile index e43fd9d..4420484 100644 --- a/Makefile +++ b/Makefile @@ -304,6 +304,7 @@ LIBS-y += test/libtest.o
LIBS-$(CONFIG_DM) += common/dm/libdm.o LIBS-$(CONFIG_DM) += drivers/demo/libdemo.o LIBS-${CONFIG_DM_BLOCK} += drivers/blockdev/libblockdev.o
+LIBS-${CONFIG_DM_BLOCK} += drivers/blockctrl/libblockctrl.o
${} ? What is this ?
Why not just reuse drivers/block and in drivers/block compile in the libblock.o so you don't polute the top-level makefile ? Easy as that.
[..]
This handles SCSI? Sata ? what ?
Should this not be called scsi_core ? sata_core ? What did the previous core do? sata? scsi? block? I'm lost.
the previous core handled disks (and cards and stuff) and partitions (think /dev/sdxy), and was largely a replacement of /disk this core handles any interface those disks are connected to (SATA, PATA, SCSI), and should replace /drivers/block
Why is this not in the commit message then ? I have a proposal, before you submit a patchset, prepare it, work on something else for a bit, then read again the commit message only and see if you still understand what it means.
Am I correct that this will look as such: user -> [ 01/11 ] -> [ 03/11 or something else ] -> [ if 03/11, then disc ]
I stop here, I don't know what this is all about, sorry.
Best regards, Marek Vasut
Best regards, Marek Vasut