On Sat, 2019-06-08 at 17:13 +0300, Konstantin Khlebnikov wrote: > > On 08.06.2019 11:25, Christoph Hellwig wrote:> On Fri, Jun 07, 2019 > > at 10:34:39AM +0300, Konstantin Khlebnikov wrote: > > > > > > Do we really need to spam dmesg with even more ATA crap? What > > about > > > a sysfs file that can be read on demand instead? > > > > > > > Makes sense. > > > > Trim state is exposed for ata_device: > > /sys/class/ata_device/devX.Y/trim > > but there is no link from scsi device to ata device so they hard to > > match. > > > > I'll think about it. > > Nope. There is no obvious way to link scsi device with ata_device. > ata_device is built on top of "transport_class" and > "attribute_container". > This some extremely over engineered sysfs framework used only in > ata/scsi. I don't want to touch this. You don't need to know any of that. The problem is actually when the ata transport classes were first created, the devices weren't properly parented. What should have happened, like every other transport class, is that the devices should have descended down to the scsi device as the leaf in an integrated fashion. Instead, what we seem to have is three completely separate trees. So if you look at a SAS device, you see from the pci device: host2/port-2:0/end_device-2:0/target2:0:0/2:0:0:0/block/sdb/sdb1 But if you look at a SATA device, you see three separate paths: ata3/host3/target3\:0\:0/3\:0\:0\:0/block/sda/sda1 ata3/link3/dev3.0/ata_device/dev3.0 ata3/ata_port/ata3 Instead of an integrated tree Unfortunately, this whole thing is unfixable now. If I integrate the tree properly, the separate port and link directories will get subsumed and we won't be able to recover them with judicious linking so scripts relying on them will break. The best we can probably do is add additional links with what we have. To follow the way we usually do it, there should be a link from the ata device to the scsi target, but that wouldn't help you find the "trim" files, so it sounds like you want a link from the scsi device to the ata device, which would? James
