The keep-it-in-user-space arguments seem fairly compelling to me.
Especially as we've pushed whole i/o subsystems out to user space
(iscsi, stgt, talked about fcoe, a lot of dm control, etc).
The functionality seems to align with Doug's sg/lsscsi utility chain
as well. Granted, the new utility
James Bottomley wrote:
I don't disagree with that, but the fact is that there isn't such a
tool. It's also a fact that the enterprise is reasonably unhappy with
the lack of an enclosure management infrastructure, since it's something
they got on all the other unix systems.
I don't disagree.
James Bottomley wrote:
... I wouldn't have bothered except that I could see ad-hoc
in-kernel sysfs solutions beginning to appear.
If this is true, and if no one quickly volunteers to do the utility, then
I agree with what you are doing.
-- james s
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the
Matt,
Have your resolved the unload race conditions yet?
We'd like to update lpfc for the async scans, but our testing gets blocked
very quickly by the bugs. The bugs are not necessarily specific to lpfc
or to FC.
Stack traces are below. Simple ismod/rmmod loop can trigger them
-- james s
fyi...
For FC, we have several async events, and allow for LLDDs to send their own
data or augment the generic transport event w/ additional LLDD-data. The
infrastructure is implemented generically within the scsi midlayer.
We are using Netlink w/ broadcasts to deliver the events rather than
Jeff Garzik wrote:
Fair enough, though I definitely lean towards some use of sysfs / device
model for AN-style events specifically. The media change events are
generated by the device, not the transport, and we should definitely
have an object in the device model that represents the device
