On Tue, 2011-04-12 at 22:23 +0900, Nao Nishijima wrote: > (2011/04/09 0:14), James Bottomley wrote: > > On Fri, 2011-04-08 at 07:33 -0700, Hannes Reinecke wrote: > >>> The problem I would like to discuss here is that users can not identify > >>> a disk from kernel messages when they DIRECTLY refer to these messages. > >>> For example, a device name is used instead of a symbolic link names in > >>> bootup messages, I/O devices errors and /proc/partitions âetc. > >>> > >>> In particular, users can not identify an appropriate device from a > >>> device name in syslog since different device name may be assigned to it > >>> at each boot time. > >>> > >>> My idea is able to fix this issue with small changes in scsi subsystem. > >>> Also, it is implemented as an option. Therefore, it does not affect > >>> users who do not select this option. > >>> > >> We have been discussing this problem several times in the past, and > >> indeed on these very mailing list. > >> > >> The conclusion we arrived at is that the kernel-provided device node > >> name is inherently unstable and impossible to fix within the existing > >> 'sdX' naming scheme. > >> So the choices have been to either move to a totally different naming > >> scheme or keep the naming scheme and provide the required information > >> by other means. > >> We have decided on the latter, and agreed on using udev to provide > >> persistent device names. > >> We are fully aware that any kernel related messages are subject to > >> chance after reboot, but then most kernel related messages are > >> (PID number, timestamps, login tty etc). > >> And also we are aware that any kernel messages need to be matched > >> against the current system layout to figure out any hardware-related > >> issue. > >> > >> But then basically all products requiring to filter out information > >> from kernel messages already do so I don't see a problem with that. > >> > >> Just adding an in-kernel identifier to the LUN will only be an > >> incomplete solution, as other identifiers will still be volatile. > >> > >> So I would prefer by keeping the in-kernel information as small > >> as possible to reduce memory consumption and rely on out-of-band > >> programs to provide the required mapping. > > > > So, while I agree totally with the above: udev and userspace is the way > > to go, I'm not totally opposed to having a non-invasive mechanism for > > indicating a user's preferred name for a device. I think there are a > > couple of ways to do this: > > > > 1. Entirely in userspace: just have udev consult a preferred name > > file and create say /dev/disk/by-preferred. Then have all the > > tools that normally output device information do the same (i.e. > > since real name to preferred name is 1:1, they could all do a > > reverse lookup). > > 2. have a writeable sysfs preferred_name field, either in the > > generic device or just in SCSI. The preferred name would be > > used by outbound only (i.e. kernel dev_printk messages and > > possibly /proc/partitions). All inbound uses of the device > > would come via the standard udev mechanisms > > (i.e. /dev/disk/by-preferred would be the usual symlink). This > > means from the kernel point of view, no renaming has happened. > > We'd just try to print out the preferred name in certain > > circumstances, which should solve most of the described problem. > > > > James > > > > > > > > I have a question. Why is in-kernel device name necessary? The kernel > can identify a device by major/miner number and udev can create a > device node of a prefer name. Well, that's the inbound vs outbound name I referred to above. If all you care about is inbound, this is true. > Currently, device names are only used to show to users. Therefore I > think that in-kernel device name is unnecessary if we introduce your > /dev/disk/by-prefferd idea. So if you have no problem with the kernel still printing out sdX in logs and it appearing in /proc/partitions, I'm happy with this. James -- 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
