From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 19:39:40 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 19:39:30 -0500 Received: from ping-ef-gw.ping.de ([62.72.90.14]:9750 "EHLO noefs.ping.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 19:39:22 -0500 Message-Id: <200101310038.BAA21051@noefs.ping.de> Subject: Re: Multiple SCSI host adapters, naming of attached devices In-Reply-To: <20010130224912.A388@kermit.wd21.co.uk> from Michael Pacey at "Jan 30, 2001 10:49:12 pm" To: Michael Pacey Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 01:38:39 +0100 (MET) CC: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org From: Wolfgang Wegner X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL60 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi, > Given two host adapters each with 1 disk of ID 0, how do I tell Linux which > is sda and which sdb? [...] which leads me to the question: Is there any reason for the (IMHO stupid) "dynamic" naming of SCSI devices (in contrast to e.g. IDE devices or the "physical" device naming used in Solaris)? It may be possible always maintaining the "right" order with one SCSI chain, but as soon as there is a second bus, it is really a pain. Is devfs the only solution? Regards, Wolfgang - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/