Re: megaraid driver (proposed patch)

[James Bottomley <jejb@steeleye.com>]

On Fri, 2005-03-25 at 18:47 +0000, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 25, 2005 at 12:39:52PM -0600, James Bottomley wrote:
> > On Fri, 2005-03-25 at 19:22 +0100, Bruno Cornec wrote:
> > > Would you consider to apply the following patch proposed by Thierry
> > > Vignaud as a solution for the MandrakeSoft kernel in the mainstream 2.6 
> > > kernel ?
> > 
> > Well, to be considered you'd need to cc the megaraid maintainers and the
> > linux-scsi mailing list.
> > 
> > > -if MEGARAID_NEWGEN=n
> > 
> > No, this is wrong it would break allyes configs and I'd get shot.
> 
> Why?  The megaraid drivers shouldn't have any conflicting non-static
> symbols

You get a kernel with two drivers trying to claim some of the same set
of cards.  The winner will be the driver that gets its init routines
called first, but this isn't a desirable outcome.

I wouldn't object to a patch that allows both *modules* to be built,
which is all I think the distros are after.

James


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/