On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 6:19 PM, Boaz Harrosh <bharrosh@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > [ ... ] > Perhaps consider a new alternative like the device tree as Greg suggested > or maybe finally accept the harsh realities of ConfigFS. I think that Vlad has already explained several times why ConfigFS is not suited for the needs of a storage target: a storage target must not only be able to accept configuration information from userspace but must also be able to create new directories and file nodes itself. See e.g. this message from October 6: http://kerneltrap.org/mailarchive/linux-kernel/2010/10/6/4628664. Bart. -- 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
