On 02/16/2017 06:05 PM, Keith Busch wrote: > On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 04:12:23PM +0100, Hannes Reinecke wrote: >> The device handler needs to check if a given queue belongs to >> a scsi device; only then does it make sense to attach a device >> handler. >> >> Signed-off-by: Hannes Reinecke <hare@xxxxxxxx> > > The thing I don't like is that this still has dm-mpath directly calling > into scsi. I don't think dm-mpath has any business calling protocol > specific APIs, and doesn't help other protocols with similar needs. > > Can we solve this with an indirection layer instead? > > (untested; just checking if this direction is preferable) We could, but why? ATM we're only having SCSI devices able to use device handler; adding another layer of indirection doesn't solve anything here. Moving the infrastructure one level up will only make sense if we're getting non-SCSI device handler (ANA?), but until then I'd think it's just overengineering. Cheers, Hannes -- Dr. Hannes Reinecke Teamlead Storage & Networking hare@xxxxxxx +49 911 74053 688 SUSE LINUX GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg GF: F. Imendörffer, J. Smithard, J. Guild, D. Upmanyu, G. Norton HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg)
