On Wed, 26 May 2004, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> Looks like a way to go.  I'm not sure what scan_device is supposed to
> do as I already wrote, but from looking at when it's set/cleared I'm
> pretty sure it tries to indicate whethere we're currently scanning for
> devices.  And useing slave_alloc/slave_configure is a much safer way to
> find that out then guessing from the commands sent.

Attached is a patch, that moves scan_device to
slave_alloc/_configure/_destroy, as you suggested (to be precise, as I
understood your suggestion:-))
Signed-off-by: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@SteelEye.com>