On Fri, 2015-04-10 at 09:19 +0200, Bart Van Assche 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 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.
>
Thanks for your opinion, but you're not in a position to decide what
target fabrics go into upstream.
--nab
--
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
