On Fri, Apr 10, 2015 at 12:19 AM, Bart Van Assche
<bart.vanassche@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 04/10/15 09:03, Ming Lin wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Apr 9, 2015 at 11:54 PM, Bart Van Assche
>> <bart.vanassche@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 04/09/15 09:42, Ming Lin wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/include/target/target_core_fabric.h
>>>> b/include/target/target_core_fabric.h
>>>> index e0a8191..abe3fcb 100644
>>>> --- a/include/target/target_core_fabric.h
>>>> +++ b/include/target/target_core_fabric.h
>>>> @@ -4,8 +4,8 @@
>>>> struct target_core_fabric_ops {
>>>> struct configfs_subsystem *tf_subsys;
>>>> size_t node_acl_size;
>>>> + u8 fabric_proto_ident;
>>>> char *(*get_fabric_name)(void);
>>>> - u8 (*get_fabric_proto_ident)(struct se_portal_group *);
>>>> char *(*tpg_get_wwn)(struct se_portal_group *);
>>>> u16 (*tpg_get_tag)(struct se_portal_group *);
>>>> u32 (*tpg_get_default_depth)(struct se_portal_group *);
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Hello Ming,
>>
>>
>> Hi Bart,
>>
>>>
>>> Please do not use the "fabric_" prefix in the data structure member name.
>>> Since this structure member exists inside the target_core_fabric_ops data
>>> structure it is already clear that it refers to target code and it is not
>>> needed to use the "fabric_" prefix. How about using the name
>>> "scsi_protocol"
>>> instead ?
>>
>>
>> How about "fabric_protocol"? I'm thinking maybe in the future LIO will
Fix myself: actually I mean "transport_protocol"
>> support
>> non-scsi protocol also, for example, NVME?
>
>
> Sorry but I'm not convinced that it would be a good idea to add support for
> non-SCSI protocols to LIO. If NVMe-over-fabric support has to be added
> upstream it is probably a better idea to create a separate target project
> for NVMe-over-fabric.
OK, I'll use "scsi_protocol" on next version.
>
> Bart.
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe target-devel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
