On Mon, Apr 26, 2021 at 01:19:43PM -0400, Olga Kornievskaia wrote:
> From: Olga Kornievskaia <kolga@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
> An rpc client uses a transport switch and one ore more transports
> associated with that switch. Since transports are shared among
> rpc clients, create a symlink into the xprt_switch directory
> instead of duplicating entries under each rpc client.
>
> Signed-off-by: Olga Kornievskaia <kolga@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
>..
> @@ -188,6 +204,11 @@ void rpc_sysfs_client_destroy(struct rpc_clnt *clnt)
> struct rpc_sysfs_client *rpc_client = clnt->cl_sysfs;
>
> if (rpc_client) {
> + char name[23];
> +
> + snprintf(name, sizeof(name), "switch-%d",
> + rpc_client->xprt_switch->xps_id);
> + sysfs_remove_link(&rpc_client->kobject, name);
Hi Olga,
If a client can use a single switch, shouldn't the name of the symlink
be just "switch"? This is to be consistent with other symlinks in
`sysfs` such as the ones in block layer, for example in my
`/sys/block/sda`:
bdi -> ../../../../../../../../../../../virtual/bdi/8:0
device -> ../../../5:0:0:0
--
Dan Aloni
