> Although I haven't been involved for over 8 years, it us unlikely that
> the word "SCSI" has been given up as some generic aspirin. SCSI still
> means the stuff specified in the 519 Page document copyrighted by
> ANSI, called "SMALL COMPUTER SYSTEM INTERFACE - 2", Dated May 20, 1991,
> and the
On Mon, 8 Jan 2001, Dan Hollis wrote:
> On Mon, 8 Jan 2001, Russell King wrote:
> > Seriously though, you can't depreciate a term for referring to a type of
> > bus without providing some other term to describe said bus.
>
> You need to distinguish between SCSI-the-protocol and
>
On Mon, 8 Jan 2001, Russell King wrote:
> Seriously though, you can't depreciate a term for referring to a type of
> bus without providing some other term to describe said bus.
You need to distinguish between SCSI-the-protocol and
SCSI-the-physical-layer. The term "SCSI" alone is simply too
Dan Hollis writes:
> On Mon, 8 Jan 2001, Russell King wrote:
> > I don't believe that is what it's trying to say. There have been instances
> > in the past where unplugging a SCSI device from a powered on SCSI bus can
> > result in blown terminator power fuses and the like. Whether this still
>
On Mon, 8 Jan 2001, Russell King wrote:
> > so my take is unless you explicitly use hotplug devices (I wasn't), that
> > it is much safer to unload the driver, unattach/attach scsi devices, and
> > then reload the driver (which will scan the scsi bus for devices), which
> > you need modules for.
Michael Meissner writes:
> Quoting from drivers/scsi/scsi.c:
>
> /*
>* Usage: echo "scsi add-single-device 0 1 2 3" >/proc/scsi/scsi
>* with "0 1 2 3" replaced by your "Host Channel Id Lun".
>* Consider this feature BETA.
>* CAUTION: This is not for
On Mon, Jan 08, 2001 at 07:26:01PM +0100, Ookhoi wrote:
> >3) Having drivers as modules means that you can remove them and
> >reload them. When I was working in an office, I had one scsi
> >controller that was a different brand (Adaptec) than the main scsi
> >controller
Hi Michael,
> On Fri, Jan 05, 2001 at 10:50:20PM -0600, Evan Thompson wrote:
> > I'd like to know (I know, I'm being slightly off topic, while still
> > staying on topic, so I'm on topic...er...yes) if there is any
> > advantage, be it memory-wise or architectuarally wise, to use
> > modules?
>
On Fri, Jan 05, 2001 at 10:50:20PM -0600, Evan Thompson wrote:
> I'd like to know (I know, I'm being slightly off topic, while still
> staying on topic, so I'm on topic...er...yes) if there is any
> advantage, be it memory-wise or architectuarally wise, to use modules?
>
> I already know the
On Sat, Jan 06, 2001 at 11:02:15AM +0100, J . A . Magallon wrote:
>
> On 2001.01.06 Drew Bertola wrote:
> > My best reasons are...
> >
> > Development: You don't have to recompile the kernel a billion times
> > while working on a driver, you just recompile the module. Also, you
> > can debug,
On Fri, Jan 05, 2001 at 10:50:20PM -0600, Evan Thompson wrote:
I'd like to know (I know, I'm being slightly off topic, while still
staying on topic, so I'm on topic...er...yes) if there is any
advantage, be it memory-wise or architectuarally wise, to use modules?
I already know the obvious
On Sat, Jan 06, 2001 at 11:02:15AM +0100, J . A . Magallon wrote:
On 2001.01.06 Drew Bertola wrote:
My best reasons are...
Development: You don't have to recompile the kernel a billion times
while working on a driver, you just recompile the module. Also, you
can debug, unload, fix,
Hi Michael,
On Fri, Jan 05, 2001 at 10:50:20PM -0600, Evan Thompson wrote:
I'd like to know (I know, I'm being slightly off topic, while still
staying on topic, so I'm on topic...er...yes) if there is any
advantage, be it memory-wise or architectuarally wise, to use
modules?
I
On Mon, Jan 08, 2001 at 07:26:01PM +0100, Ookhoi wrote:
3) Having drivers as modules means that you can remove them and
reload them. When I was working in an office, I had one scsi
controller that was a different brand (Adaptec) than the main scsi
controller (TekRam),
Michael Meissner writes:
Quoting from drivers/scsi/scsi.c:
/*
* Usage: echo "scsi add-single-device 0 1 2 3" /proc/scsi/scsi
* with "0 1 2 3" replaced by your "Host Channel Id Lun".
* Consider this feature BETA.
* CAUTION: This is not for hotplugging
On Mon, 8 Jan 2001, Russell King wrote:
so my take is unless you explicitly use hotplug devices (I wasn't), that
it is much safer to unload the driver, unattach/attach scsi devices, and
then reload the driver (which will scan the scsi bus for devices), which
you need modules for.
I don't
Dan Hollis writes:
On Mon, 8 Jan 2001, Russell King wrote:
I don't believe that is what it's trying to say. There have been instances
in the past where unplugging a SCSI device from a powered on SCSI bus can
result in blown terminator power fuses and the like. Whether this still
On Mon, 8 Jan 2001, Russell King wrote:
Seriously though, you can't depreciate a term for referring to a type of
bus without providing some other term to describe said bus.
You need to distinguish between SCSI-the-protocol and
SCSI-the-physical-layer. The term "SCSI" alone is simply too
On Mon, 8 Jan 2001, Dan Hollis wrote:
On Mon, 8 Jan 2001, Russell King wrote:
Seriously though, you can't depreciate a term for referring to a type of
bus without providing some other term to describe said bus.
You need to distinguish between SCSI-the-protocol and
Although I haven't been involved for over 8 years, it us unlikely that
the word "SCSI" has been given up as some generic aspirin. SCSI still
means the stuff specified in the 519 Page document copyrighted by
ANSI, called "SMALL COMPUTER SYSTEM INTERFACE - 2", Dated May 20, 1991,
and the first
On 2001.01.06 Drew Bertola wrote:
> My best reasons are...
>
> Development: You don't have to recompile the kernel a billion times
> while working on a driver, you just recompile the module. Also, you
> can debug, unload, fix, recompile, reload a module to add or fix
> pieces of it all
My best reasons are...
Development: You don't have to recompile the kernel a billion times
while working on a driver, you just recompile the module. Also, you
can debug, unload, fix, recompile, reload a module to add or fix
pieces of it all (hopefully) without rebooting.
Practical usage: When
I'd like to know (I know, I'm being slightly off topic, while still
staying on topic, so I'm on topic...er...yes) if there is any
advantage, be it memory-wise or architectuarally wise, to use modules?
I already know the obvious points of if you are creating a distro that
it is usually good to
I'd like to know (I know, I'm being slightly off topic, while still
staying on topic, so I'm on topic...er...yes) if there is any
advantage, be it memory-wise or architectuarally wise, to use modules?
I already know the obvious points of if you are creating a distro that
it is usually good to
24 matches
Mail list logo
