Should isci create its own device class?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



For compatibility with other software raid environments an isci [1] device may contain up to two controller instances per pci device.

Currently the sysfs path for its scsi_host objects is:
../../devices/pci0000:00/0000:00:01.0/0000:01:00.0/0000:02:08.0/0000:03:00.0/host10/scsi_host/host10
../../devices/pci0000:00/0000:00:01.0/0000:01:00.0/0000:02:08.0/0000:03:00.0/host11/scsi_host/host11

But to reflect reality the pci device is actually the parent of two independent controller instances. With a mockup like:
../../devices/pci0000:00/0000:00:01.0/0000:01:00.0/0000:02:08.0/0000:03:00.0/controller0/host10/scsi_host/host10
../../devices/pci0000:00/0000:00:01.0/0000:01:00.0/0000:02:08.0/0000:03:00.0/controller1/host11/scsi_host/host11

I can see this being beneficial in a few ways:

1/ fix dev_printk() messages which right now give an ambiguous "isci 0000:03:00.0" prefix 2/ controller boundaries are visible via the sysfs path without need to to look at sas_addresses to determine the controller. 2/ if we ever wanted to support some per controller attributes between the global pci attributes and the scsi_host attributes.

...but would this confuse /dev/disk/by-path/ or any other unintended side effects?

--
Dan

[1]: http://marc.info/?l=linux-scsi&m=129703780424729&w=2
--
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


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [SCSI Target Devel]     [Linux SCSI Target Infrastructure]     [Kernel Newbies]     [IDE]     [Security]     [Git]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux ATA RAID]     [Linux IIO]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]
  Powered by Linux