On Wed, 2006-05-31 at 12:46 -0700, Alexis Bruemmer wrote: > there is a sas_device, sas_end_device, and a sas_expander dir. > sas_device contains the same info as sas_end_device, and a sas_expander > can we eliminate one or the other? Or was this a design choice? Not really. This is a design choice given to us by the interface. Everything that's connected to a port is a sas_device. As such, they all share a set of characteristics (initiator and target roles, sas address and so forth). The specific devices (sas_expander and sas_end_device) contain only parameters that are specific to the device, so the expander shows the manufacturer and component info. The end_device shows the SAS mandated parameters like ready led and nexus loss timeout). > Also during the boot process on the x260 with an expander we see these > printk's: > sas: phy[n] matched wide port0 > If we are going to print this then we better be sure that this is truly > a wide port. It seems under the sys/class/ we have both a single > port0:0 and then also port-0:0:[n]-- a port[n] for each phy[n]. and > although each phy seems to have the same sas_address the end_device > attached to that phy have unique addresses. My understanding is that a > wide port has multiple phys with the same sas address and are attached > to one end device. I believe that the expander situation is not the > same as wide port. If this is the case then it is as simple as changing > the printk statement to not say "wide port" As I read the code, it only prints that when it actually finds a wide port (as in a port that already has a phy attached) ... do an ls -R of your tree and I'll see if I can figure out what your topology is. 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
