Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 16 May 2007 05:19:40 +0530 | From | "Satyam Sharma" <> | Subject | Re: Asynchronous scsi scanning |
| |
On 5/16/07, Arjan van de Ven <arjan@linux.intel.com> wrote: > Satyam Sharma wrote: > >> > >semantics of it (read-only? read-write? write-only? > > > > Well, it _has_ to be write, don't really care if it's read-write or > > write-only. I would still prefer read-write, but we can go ahead with > > write-only too. It doesn't really matter, does it? > > just to be devils advocate... > it should be a read that returns when done,
Heh, yeah. We just need to trigger that scsi_complete_async_scans() after all ... might as well abuse all intuition on the user's behalf :-)
> and that can be polled
Gaah! :-)
But seriously, though, this sysfs attribute can be implemented _any which way_. Better for us if we do it the simplest way (and which taxes the user's intuition the least). Just that Matthew asked so many questions so I thought I might as well answer them :-) - 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/
| |