On 1/4/21 2:50 PM, Finn Thain wrote:
> On Mon, 4 Jan 2021, Bart Van Assche wrote:
>> Additionally, there is a good alternative available for the sbp driver.
>> Every system I know of that is equipped with a Firewire port also has an
>> Ethernet port. So users who want to provide SCSI target
On Mon, 4 Jan 2021, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> On 6/16/20 7:07 PM, Finn Thain wrote:
> > On Tue, 16 Jun 2020, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> >> As far as I know the sbp driver only has had one user ever and that
> >> user is no longer user the sbp driver.
> >
> > So, you estimate the userbase at zero.
On 6/16/20 7:07 PM, Finn Thain wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Jun 2020, Bart Van Assche wrote:
>> As far as I know the sbp driver only has had one user ever and that user
>> is no longer user the sbp driver.
>
> So, you estimate the userbase at zero. Can you give a confidence level?
> Actual measurement
On Tue, 16 Jun 2020, Martin K. Petersen wrote:
>
> However, keeping code around is not free.
Right. And removing code isn't free either, if it forces people to find
workarounds.
> Core interfaces change frequently. Nobody enjoys having to tweak host
> templates for 50 devices they have
On Tue, 16 Jun 2020, Martin K. Petersen wrote:
> > I haven't used this driver for a long time, but I still own PowerMacs
> > with firewire, and I know I'm not the only one.
>
I need to correct what I wrote above. I recall that years ago, when I
needed to share storage from my Linux box to my
Chris,
> I don't especially want it to be gone, nor can I be sure there are no
> users of what is as far as I can tell a working piece of code. I can
> tell you that I never hear about it (other than the odd patch),
> whereas I do get emails out of the blue for some of my other (much
> smaller)
Finn,
> I haven't used this driver for a long time, but I still own PowerMacs
> with firewire, and I know I'm not the only one.
I also have old 1394 hardware kicking around in the basement. But having
worked with FireWire shared storage targets in the past, I have zero
desire to ever touch any
On Tue, 16 Jun 2020, Bart Van Assche wrote:
>
> As far as I know the sbp driver only has had one user ever and that user
> is no longer user the sbp driver.
So, you estimate the userbase at zero. Can you give a confidence level?
Actual measurement is hard because when end users encounter
On Tue, 2020-06-16 at 14:13 +, Johannes Thumshirn wrote:
> On 16/06/2020 16:09, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> > On 2020-06-16 02:42, Finn Thain wrote:
> > > Martin said, "I'd appreciate a patch to remove it"
> > >
> > > And Bart said, "do you want to keep this driver in the kernel
> > > tree?"
> >
On 16/06/2020 16:09, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> On 2020-06-16 02:42, Finn Thain wrote:
>> Martin said, "I'd appreciate a patch to remove it"
>>
>> And Bart said, "do you want to keep this driver in the kernel tree?"
>>
>> AFAICT both comments are quite ambiguous. I don't see an actionable
>>
On 16/06/2020 16:34, James Bottomley wrote:
> On Tue, 2020-06-16 at 14:13 +, Johannes Thumshirn wrote:
>> On 16/06/2020 16:09, Bart Van Assche wrote:
>>> On 2020-06-16 02:42, Finn Thain wrote:
Martin said, "I'd appreciate a patch to remove it"
And Bart said, "do you want to keep
On 2020-06-16 02:42, Finn Thain wrote:
> Martin said, "I'd appreciate a patch to remove it"
>
> And Bart said, "do you want to keep this driver in the kernel tree?"
>
> AFAICT both comments are quite ambiguous. I don't see an actionable
> request, just an expression of interest from people
On Mon, 15 Jun 2020, Chris Boot wrote:
> On 15/06/2020 00:28, Finn Thain wrote:
> > On Sun, 14 Jun 2020, Chris Boot wrote:
> >
> >> I expect that if someone finds this useful it can stick around (but
> >> that's not my call).
> >
> > Who's call is that? If the patch had said "From: Martin K.
On 15/06/2020 00:28, Finn Thain wrote:
> On Sun, 14 Jun 2020, Chris Boot wrote:
>
>> I expect that if someone finds this useful it can stick around (but
>> that's not my call).
>
> Who's call is that? If the patch had said "From: Martin K. Petersen" and
> "This driver is being removed because
On Sun, 14 Jun 2020, Chris Boot wrote:
> I expect that if someone finds this useful it can stick around (but
> that's not my call).
Who's call is that? If the patch had said "From: Martin K. Petersen" and
"This driver is being removed because it has the following defects..."
that would be
On 14/06/2020 01:03, Finn Thain wrote:
> On Sat, 13 Jun 2020, Chris Boot wrote:
>
>> I no longer have the time to maintain this subsystem nor the hardware to
>> test patches with.
>
> Then why not patch MAINTAINERS, and orphan it, as per usual practice?
>
> $ git log --oneline MAINTAINERS |
On Sat, 13 Jun 2020, Chris Boot wrote:
> I no longer have the time to maintain this subsystem nor the hardware to
> test patches with.
Then why not patch MAINTAINERS, and orphan it, as per usual practice?
$ git log --oneline MAINTAINERS | grep -i orphan
> It also doesn't appear to have any
17 matches
Mail list logo
