On Friday, November 21, 2014 03:32:55 PM WANG Chao wrote:
> On 11/21/14 at 07:51am, Hannes Reinecke wrote:
> > On 11/21/2014 06:43 AM, WANG Chao wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > On 11/20/14 at 03:56pm, Thomas Renninger wrote:
> > >> From: Hannes Reinecke <hare@xxxxxxx>
> > >>
> > >> Some iSCSI initiator present firmware information in
> > >> /sys/firmware/ibft or /sys/firmware/iscsi_bootX
> > >>
> > >> Whenever we detect one of those directories we should assume
> > >> that the iSCSI devices should be activated.
> > >>
> > >> Also incorporates SUSE patches:
> > >> 0049:
> > >> 95iscsi: Use 'ip=ibft' for ibft autoconfiguration
> > >>
> > >> For iBFT autoconfiguration we should be setting 'ip=ibft'
> > >> instead of rd.neednet. This should instruct dracut to only
> > >> enable the iBFT interfaces and leave the rest alone.
> > >
> > > I think,
> > >
> > > /sys/firmware/ibft is created for iBFT if detected.
> > > /sys/firmware/iscsi_bootX is created for hardware iSCSI if detected.
> >
> > Nope.
> >
> > ibft is created whenever an iBFT section (either in system ROM
> > or via EFI) is detected.
> > iscsi_boot is created for be2iscsi devices, which use an iBFT-like
> > interface.
> >
> > Both provide the same attributes.
>
> Yes, they have same attributes.
The same sysfs attributes?
> But IIRC iBFT is provided by ACPI or EFI and the other is provided by
> HBA's firmware. Right?
But this should not matter.
If the kernel differs both APIs and provides a unified sysfs interface,
not differing in userspace again would be the right thing to do.
Thomas
PS: I continue to collect missing patches tomorrow and do a big resend...
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe initramfs" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
