On 08/26/05 15:24, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> Luben Tuikov wrote:
>
>>Even simpler: the transport layer, calls SCSI Core, saying: "Hey here is
>>a pointer to struct scsi_domain_device. If you want, you an send REPORT
>>LUNS and other things to it."
>
>
> For the SG_IO ioctl, /dev/sg and request_queue usage, SCSI core must map
> an address (currently HCIL) into a scsi_domain_device pointer. These
The request queue is associated with the LU, not the scsi_domain_device.
When SCSI Core discovers the LU, it sets up the request queue for it,
etc. Again this is the role of SCSI Core, not messing up with transport
specific stuff.
> upper layer kernel elements rely on this "SCSI address", and rely on the
> fact that SCSI core can route from a block device straight to a SCSI
> LLD, using nothing more than this "SCSI address."
I don't get this.
> That is the heart of the routing/addressing that the SCSI core must perform.
Disagree: now: scsi_device <--> request_queue, then: struct LU <-->
request_queue.
The LU points to the domain_device (as its parent). The domain_device
has a void *lldd_dev in it.
> Right now the addressing is hardcoded to HCIL. But that can be
> changed... One proposal was to use (host,string) identifiers.
Who? Who is proposing this? I never saw an email to SCSI Core about
this proposal? Is there any more information about this proposal
and what is the justification of it? Any specs and docs?
Luben
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
