Dave Wysochanski wrote:
Do we have an agreed upon scheme?
I noticed in 2.6.23-rc1, the RDAC module is named "dm-mpath-rdac.ko",
but the source file is "dm-rdac.c". Should we be naming things
Are you sure about that? In linus's tree it is named dm-mpath-rdac.c.
The module that is created is named dm-rdac.ko.
"dm-mpath-hwhname" everywhere? If so, should we rename dm-emc?
I was not sure exactly what was correct for the HP handler. Currently
it follows the dm-emc scheme, which is probably wrong.
Alasdair, initially wanted the modules and file names to have dm-mpath
prefixes, but userspace for emc is already passing in "emc" and
dm_get_hw_handler does request_module("dm-%s", name) and
__find_hw_handler_type does strcmp(name, hwhi->hwht.name).
So we ended up doing a partial conversion leaving userspace alone, but
changing the filenames to what Alasdair wanted. So rdac got the source
filename dm-mpath-rdac.c, but its module gets the name dm-rdac.ko.
So yeah, I forgot about that in the review, and instead of
obj-$(CONFIG_DM_MULTIPATH_HP) += dm-hp-sw.o
you should do
dm-hw-objs := dm-mpath-hw.o
......
obj-$(CONFIG_DM_MULTIPATH_HP_SW) += dm-hp-sw.o
In the Makefile, and the source filename for should be dm-mpath-hp-sw.c.
And dm-emc.c should probably be changed, although we could probably do
it after the logical unit follow-over cap patch is cleaned up and merged.
--
dm-devel mailing list
dm-devel@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel
