Re: [RFC] scsi host sysfs support again [0/4]

[Mike Anderson <andmike@us.ibm.com>]

Willem Riede [wrlk@riede.org] wrote:
> On 2003.05.06 13:23 Mike Anderson wrote:
> > 
> > Other classes to consider:
> > 	(scsi_tape or tape), (scsi_disk or disk), (scsi_gen).
> > I believe Greg KH mentioned something to me about why we would select
> > scsi_tape over tape, but I have forgot the reason.
> > 
> Would that be, because ide_tape could have different attributes?
> 

I believe it is more of a late in the development cycle issue. There has
not been time applied to determining who would create the class and why
we would want a very generic class vs scsi_*. At least I have not seen
this information. Mochel or others may have better information. The new
class and class_device structure are fairly new so there is still some
conversion time to understand what to do and what not to do with them.

> In any case, there are some unique properties of onstream tapes that I
> would love to make available, so should osst define its own class?

If they are per driver attributes they should be exposed under
/sys/bus/scsi/drivers/osst. If they are per device attributes a class
may be the answer, but I have not thought about the upper level
attributes much yet. I did not think we would have classes at this
granularity, but maybe we do.

-andmike
--
Michael Anderson
andmike@us.ibm.com