Jonathan McDowell [mailto:noodles@xxxxxxxx] sez: > On Tue, Nov 20, 2007 at 12:49:49PM -0500, Salyzyn, Mark wrote: > > The aacraid cards, which uses hba_monitor_version, > > hba_kernel_version and hba_bios_version for each piece > > does not fit into the single 'firmware revision' common ideal > While I've used the aacraid cards in the past I think I agree > with you that no 1 of those 3 pieces of information represents > the firmware. Perhaps it could export a triplet though? A single can be used in 99% of all cases, OEM or users can muck it up. I would 'vote' for hba_kernel_version == fw_version. Maybe add a companion standard for hba_bios_version == bios_version and hba_monitor_version == exec_version (executive_version) if other cards can supply such info ... > Management stuff always seems to be tied to a single card. It's one of > the things that puts me off hardware RAID. There are 113 cards this driver works for in concert. Maybe my tail feathers are showing ;-> > Do the management folks actually have some ideas about what sort of > interface they'd like in sysfs? Simple answer: No Detailed answer (I digress): They love ioctls as a commonality across all operating systems and a pass-through to proprietary firmware portals: binary, bidirectional, atomic and freely formatted migrating structures that do not herd the cats into just one specification. These are all eventually presented as documented stable objects exported by a sizeable C++ StorLib(tm) library that provides the consistent interface that the OEMs and Adaptec use to the higher level install, event, GUI and CLI applications. Driver is only involved as a transport. Sincerely -- Mark Salyzyn - To unsubscribe from this list: 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