Problem is that on the mainframe I don't have access to the primary port. Virtualization is done in adapter microcode. I just have access to the virtual port.
I was afraid you'd say this... that was the other caveat. OK - given that the primary port doesn't exist what you have makes a lot of sense. I guess we have the 2 options: - add the 2 attributes per host - create a host and set the attributes (and this is major overkill) I have some reservations about the data passing that allows the virtual port to get the physical port data, but it's probably manageable. With this direction - your patch is fine, with the caveat that I want to explore the most meaningful names for the attributes. Does port_name and physical_port_name become odd to a user ? Is some script writer bound to assume they always wanted the physical name as they would only see a difference if on a mainframe ? What if we change the names to be more npiv-centric. What about ppn (for physical_port_name) and ppn_id (for physical_port_id) ?
Seems that requirements for workstations and mainframes are quite contrary.
Not really - just there are several different implementation models, both at the adapter and at the OS side. -- james - : 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
