Jeff Garzik wrote:
> I disagree completely with this approach.
>
> You don't need a table of hooks for the case where libata is disabled in
> .config. Thus, it's only useful for the case where libsas is loaded as
> a module, but libata is not.
Indeed, I misunderstood what James Bottomley wanted, so I reworked the
patch. It has the same functionality as before, but this module uses
the module loader/symbol resolver for all the functions in libata, and
allows libsas to (optionally) call into sas_ata with weak references by
pushing a table of the necessary function pointers into libsas at
sas_ata load time. Thus, libsas doesn't need to load libata/sas_ata
unless it actually finds a SATA device.
> The libsas code should directly call libata functions. If ATA support
> in libsas is disabled in .config, then those functions will never be
> called, thus never loaded the libata module.
I certainly can (and now do) call libata functions from sas_ata.
However, there are a few cases where libsas needs to call libata (ex.
sas_ioctl); for those cases, I think the function pointers are still
necessary because I don't want to make libsas require libata. In any
case, if ATA support is disabled in .config, sata_is_dev always returns
0, so the dead-code eliminator should zap that out of libsas entirely.
As usual, thank you for any feedback that you have.
Link to version 3:
http://sweaglesw.net/~djwong/docs/sas-ata_3.patch
--D
Signed-off-by: Darrick J. Wong <[email protected]>
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
