On Mon, 20 Apr 2009 11:55:52 +0200 Hannes Reinecke <hare@xxxxxxx> wrote: > Hi Mike, > > Mike Christie wrote: > > Hey Hannes > > > > While we are talking about LSF stuff and you are not busy with distro > > stuff.... > > > Ah, irony detector kicked in. > (Current bugilla count is at 114. Ask me about being busy.) > > > I implemented this based on what we talked about at the last LSF. > > > Yes, I've seen it. You again beat me to it; I've done an initial implementation > already but failed to send it mainline. Sigh. > > But yes, we _do_ need something like this. > > > I was thinking that maybe using kobject_uevent_env would be better. The > > info that gets passed to userspace would be the decoded sense and > > asc/ascq based on values from the drivers/scsi/constants.c. > > > No. This patch has the possibility of generating _huge_ amounts of > messages, most of which are information only and of no influence > to the actual operation. > udev would be flooded with it and won't be able to react to 'important' > messages while processing them. Do we really have huge amount of messages, errors, unit attentions, etc? We already have a mechanism to send events to user space, sdev_evt_send(). Could we simply use (or extend) it? > Hence a separate mechanism like the proposed SCSI generic netlink > facility is the better approach. -- 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
