From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [PATCH] add sysfs attributes to scan and delete scsi_devices Date: Sun, 13 Jul 2003 14:43:19 +0100 Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org Message-ID: <20030713144319.A24927@infradead.org> References: <20030708134016.A32161@beaverton.ibm.com> <1057697416.1825.10.camel@mulgrave> <20030708221350.A19804@infradead.org> <20030708152440.A373@beaverton.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from phoenix.mvhi.com ([195.224.96.167]:5136 "EHLO phoenix.infradead.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S267261AbTGMN2f (ORCPT ); Sun, 13 Jul 2003 09:28:35 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20030708152440.A373@beaverton.ibm.com>; from patmans@us.ibm.com on Tue, Jul 08, 2003 at 03:24:40PM -0700 List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: Patrick Mansfield Cc: James Bottomley , SCSI Mailing List On Tue, Jul 08, 2003 at 03:24:40PM -0700, Patrick Mansfield wrote: > Scanning makes more sense as a host attribute (or as a target attribute, > but we don't have a target device today). So we should have a scan host attribute for that. > Deletion of a scsi_device makes > more sense as a /sysfs/bus/scsi (or even scsi_device) attribute that takes > a bus_id. I don't think it makes sense as a /sysfs/bus/scsi attribute. Having it as a scsi_device attribute makes lots of sense, I just wonder whether the non-symmetric interface would confuse users. Probably not too much as scannaing a bus an deleting a device isn't really a symmetric interface anyway.`