On 08/26/05 15:24, Jeff Garzik wrote: > Luben Tuikov wrote: > >>Even simpler: the transport layer, calls SCSI Core, saying: "Hey here is >>a pointer to struct scsi_domain_device. If you want, you an send REPORT >>LUNS and other things to it." > > > For the SG_IO ioctl, /dev/sg and request_queue usage, SCSI core must map > an address (currently HCIL) into a scsi_domain_device pointer. These The request queue is associated with the LU, not the scsi_domain_device. When SCSI Core discovers the LU, it sets up the request queue for it, etc. Again this is the role of SCSI Core, not messing up with transport specific stuff. > upper layer kernel elements rely on this "SCSI address", and rely on the > fact that SCSI core can route from a block device straight to a SCSI > LLD, using nothing more than this "SCSI address." I don't get this. > That is the heart of the routing/addressing that the SCSI core must perform. Disagree: now: scsi_device <--> request_queue, then: struct LU <--> request_queue. The LU points to the domain_device (as its parent). The domain_device has a void *lldd_dev in it. > Right now the addressing is hardcoded to HCIL. But that can be > changed... One proposal was to use (host,string) identifiers. Who? Who is proposing this? I never saw an email to SCSI Core about this proposal? Is there any more information about this proposal and what is the justification of it? Any specs and docs? Luben - : send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
