Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 12 Apr 2003 17:19:04 -0700 (PDT)
From:      Nate Lawson <nate@root.org>
To:        Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
Cc:        cvs-all@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   Re: cvs commit: src/sys/cam/scsi scsi_da.c 
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSF.4.21.0304121707290.38888-100000@root.org>
In-Reply-To: <25540.1050174072@critter.freebsd.dk>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, 12 Apr 2003, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
> While attacking on unproven assumptions is all the rage these days
> it is still rather embarrasing when people point out that you are
> wrong in all aspects of your attack:
> 
> 	The ioctl function in scsi_da is not called, libcam opens
> 	/dev/xpt and uses an ioctl there to find the correct pass
> 	device.  The call path to the function has been disabled
> 	for a period with not a single complaint that I have been
> 	able to discover.

However, up until your commit, I could still open /dev/da0 and ioctl it to
get its associated passthrough device.  You have now removed that
capability, which is an API change.  Your commit left it in all the other
CAM periphs (sa, cd, etc.)  I saw zero discussion of this on any list or
any "reviewed by" message in the commit.  I did incorrectly believe that
camcontrol depended on this behavior and I stand corrected.

There are a lot of unanswered questions:  Do you plan to remove this from
other devices?  If this is part of a larger API change, where is the
public discussion?  If not, why did you only change da(4)?

> 	Second, I have discussed this particular change with ken@,
> 	who as you correctly point out is the maintainer, and he
> 	agreed that the function was unused.

It's great to see that you got review.  Notice of this in the commit
message would have saved both of us the wasted time of talking about it.
 
> So I really don't know why or what compelled you to attack me here,
> whatever it was: please try to control it better in the future.

It's pretty simple:
1. API removal
2. Apparent lack of review and/or public discussion

-Nate



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.21.0304121707290.38888-100000>