On 08/31/2009 11:45 AM, Rakesh Ranjan wrote:
> Mike Christie wrote:
>> ccing Or.
>>
>> Or, I am ccing you because some time ago Erez was working on support for
>> older RHEL and SLES kernels for OFED. It looks like the patch below
>> would not be useful to you because iser is supported in those kernels,
>> but did you guys all need RHEL 4 and maybe SLES 9 support too?
>>
>>
>>
>> On 08/31/2009 08:15 AM, Rakesh Ranjan wrote:
>>> Hi Mike,
>>>
>>> Attached is patch for libiscsi/libiscsi_tcp to support cxgb3i on
>>> RHEL-5.{,0,1,3} and SLES 10 and it applied on top of
>>> 2.6.14-23_compat.patch. Its based on your work for RHEL-5.4. I have run
>>> the regression test on mentioned platform and it worked without any
>>> problem. If you find it okay, then I will send the final patch with
>>> little bit more cleanup and needed Makefile changes.
>>>
>>> Regards
>>> Rakesh Ranjan
>>
>> I think you reverted some fixes/changes from upstream. For example the
>> code below is a change I did upstream, but it did not make it into RHEL
>> 5.4. You also reverted Erez's debugging stuff from upstream. You can
>> check kernel.git/git to see the commits that have been done upstream
>> then check if the are not present in RHEL 5.4 (I think the code in
>> open-iscsi.org/kernel should be in sync with what I just send to James
>> for scsi-misc/2.6.32).
>
> Okay I will re spin the patch against scsi-misc/2.6.32.
>
>> How do you plan on distributing the patch? Are you doing to intergate it
>> into the 2.6.14-23_compat.patch patch with maybe some ifdef RHEL/SLESs,
>> or are you going to add a new patch for RHEL/SLES then in the Makefile
>> figure out if we are using a RHEL/SLES kernel, or are you just going to
>> carry it yourself?
>>
>
> Right now in my local tree I am using it as separate patch with Makefile
> changes to pick it up depending upon platform used. Unless you have some
> other plans, I think this approach would be good for upstream inclusion.
>

My preference would be to integrate it into 2.6.14-23_compat.patch if it 
is not too crazy, because then when I update the patches I only have to 
update the one patch.

If it becomes a ifdef porting mess then two patches is ok.

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"open-iscsi" group.
To post to this group, send email to open-iscsi@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
open-iscsi+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/open-iscsi
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to