Mike Christie wrote: > Hannes Reinecke wrote: >>> The patch below begins to push the scsi hw handler code down to the >>> scsi >>> layer. I only began to covert dm-emc.c and it only hooks in at the >>> sense >>> decoding in scsi_error.c. I wanted to make sure I was going about the >>> module loading and binding correctly. With a new target bus we could >>> do >>> some driver model stuff instead, but I was not sure if that was >>> appropriate for this? >>> >> Why don't we use scsi_devinfo for this? > > I was adding my fields when I noticed this comment: > > > * Do not add to this list, use the command line or proc interface to add > * to the scsi_dev_info_list. This table will eventually go away. > > >> We have to have some sort of device table anyway as these handlers are >> far from being generic, so any sense code which triggers action on one >> device might be perfectly ok for others. > > When I was looking for the history of that commet, I thought I read that > we are supposed to be moving to some userspace approach that pushes that > info down via some magic interface. > I added this comment at the wrong place. I meant to say I thought we are supposed to be moving away from the kernel devinfo list to some userspace one that gets sent down via the module_param or some new magic interface. - : 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
