On 09/13/2017 12:01 AM, Kenjiro Nakayama wrote: > Currently netlink command reply support option > (TCMU_ATTR_SUPP_KERN_CMD_REPLY) can be enabled only on module > scope. Because of that, once an application enables the netlink > command reply support, all applications using target_core_user.ko I am ok with the idea for the patch, but what type of setup do you have where there are multiple applications using the interface and some support it and some do not? Is it because tcmu-runner is starting by default due to something like a distro systemd unit file and then you also have your app running too? Also, if you do not implement sync netlink support, how does your daemon tell the kernel if the device failed to setup in the daemon? For deletion how did you work around the uio crashes and leaks? > would be expected to support the netlink reply. To make matters worse, > users will not be able to add a device via configfs manually. > What is the specific issue with manually setting it up through configfs? rtslib/tagretcli use the same configfs operations and does not know what tcmu and daemons like tcmu-runner support. -- 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
