From owner-freebsd-scsi@FreeBSD.ORG  Fri Mar 12 14:51:40 2010
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-scsi@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-scsi@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 61A39106564A
	for <freebsd-scsi@freebsd.org>; Fri, 12 Mar 2010 14:51:40 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from mj@feral.com)
Received: from ns1.feral.com (ns1.feral.com [192.67.166.1])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 34B298FC16
	for <freebsd-scsi@freebsd.org>; Fri, 12 Mar 2010 14:51:39 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from [172.16.135.102] (lportal.in1.lcl [172.16.1.9])
	by ns1.feral.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o2CEpd1f009632
	for <freebsd-scsi@freebsd.org>; Fri, 12 Mar 2010 06:51:39 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from mj@feral.com)
Message-ID: <4B9A54F6.8040204@feral.com>
Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2010 06:51:34 -0800
From: Matthew Jacob <mj@feral.com>
Organization: Feral Software
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US;
	rv:1.9.1.8) Gecko/20100227 Thunderbird/3.0.3
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: freebsd-scsi@freebsd.org
References: <3bbf2fe11002281655i61a5f0a0if3f381ad0c4a1ef8@mail.gmail.com>	<3bbf2fe11003031357o518d6028m8157d9110a9122f3@mail.gmail.com>	<4B8EF128.8050704@feral.com>	<3bbf2fe11003031532u2207eb55h19c3a045215a7d84@mail.gmail.com>	<4B8EF336.80107@feral.com>	<3bbf2fe11003031547kd5f7314t3d83b2bde06c1c2f@mail.gmail.com>	<4B8EF990.5030407@feral.com>	<3bbf2fe11003031607wa3727b5ke89bc2a909d4d6a6@mail.gmail.com>	<4B901419.8060800@feral.com>	<3bbf2fe11003041737p30690522ya81e1b8f4bd6bbf9@mail.gmail.com>
	<3bbf2fe11003120601y3c403a1ct50f9fc6c1f0903bf@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <3bbf2fe11003120601y3c403a1ct50f9fc6c1f0903bf@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.3
	(ns1.feral.com [192.168.221.1]);
	Fri, 12 Mar 2010 06:51:39 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Re: How is supposed to be protected the units list?
X-BeenThere: freebsd-scsi@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: SCSI subsystem <freebsd-scsi.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-scsi>,
	<mailto:freebsd-scsi-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-scsi>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-scsi@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-scsi-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-scsi>,
	<mailto:freebsd-scsi-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2010 14:51:40 -0000


I'm okay with it at present.

> So, as long as it seems nobody had a strong argument against this
> patch, what do you think about me committing it?
> We can further refine later if we think it is the case.
>
> Also, I think that Matt's patch should be committed just after this
> one (and possibly we should investigate a similar add-on for the ata
> counterpart too?).
>
> Thanks,
> Attilio
>
>
>