Chip Coldwell wrote:
> From: Hannes Reinecke <hare@xxxxxxx>
> diff --git a/drivers/md/dm-hw-handler.h b/drivers/md/dm-hw-handler.h
>> index 9216682..6f91b55 100644
>> --- a/drivers/md/dm-hw-handler.h
>> +++ b/drivers/md/dm-hw-handler.h
>> @@ -15,10 +15,31 @@
>>
>> struct hw_handler_type;
>>
>> +#define CTLR_ID_LEN 256
>> +
>> +struct hw_controller {
>> + struct list_head node;
>> + struct hw_controller_type *type;
>> + unsigned char ctlr_id[CTLR_ID_LEN];
>> + struct kref kref;
>> + spinlock_t lock;
>> + struct list_head cmd_list;
>> + int submitted;
>> + void *context;
>> +};
>> +
>> +struct hw_controller_type {
>> + char *name;
>> +
>> + int (*create) (struct hw_controller *ctlr);
>> + void (*destroy) (struct hw_controller *ctlr);
>> +};
>> +
>
> Would it make sense to make hw_controller_type a kobj_type? That way,
> the controller topology could be reflected in sysfs, where it can be
> reached by tools such as lsscsi.
>
Eventually, maybe.
Plan is to add userland support to manually declare and assign
controller to each priority group.
But I haven't really sorted out the details there (how to pass
information etc) and I really would like to have the basic
infrastructure agreed upon first.
And implementing a kobj_type at this point would be a bit
over the top as we are in the very preliminary stages here.
Once the controller framework is accepted we can think about it.
Cheers,
Hannes
--
Dr. Hannes Reinecke zSeries & Storage
hare@xxxxxxx +49 911 74053 688
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg
GF: Markus Rex, HRB 16746 (AG Nürnberg)
--
dm-devel mailing list
dm-devel@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel
