On 7 March 2018 at 15:03, Keith Busch <keith.busch@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, Mar 07, 2018 at 02:40:39PM +0100, Hannes Reinecke wrote: >> The nice thing about the holders/slave is that one can discover the >> topology, and potentially figure out any issues (like one path going >> down etc). > > I also thought the sysfs hierarchy was useful, but it sounds like causes > more problems than it solves. :( The problem is that it's the first of its kind in regard to virtual slaves/devices and many of the consumers of block device sysfs simply weren't ready for it to appear where it did. Perhaps if it had been a different part of sysfs hierarchy and/or linked up a different way (virtual-slaves/?) it would have been invisible to programs that weren't ready to consume it... -- Sitsofe | http://sucs.org/~sits/