From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] scsi: remove usage of proc_name from scsi_host_alloc Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2005 17:07:12 +0000 Message-ID: <20051113170712.GA9740@infradead.org> References: <200511131619.jADGJFwQ032002@einhorn.in-berlin.de> <20051113164222.GA9308@infradead.org> <43776EA3.3010607@s5r6.in-berlin.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from pentafluge.infradead.org ([213.146.154.40]:40655 "EHLO pentafluge.infradead.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S964942AbVKMRHN (ORCPT ); Sun, 13 Nov 2005 12:07:13 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <43776EA3.3010607@s5r6.in-berlin.de> Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: Stefan Richter Cc: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org On Sun, Nov 13, 2005 at 05:49:39PM +0100, Stefan Richter wrote: > >->name is not mandatory. You may just implement ->info > > No, ->info is optional according to a current comment, and according to > the implementation as far as I have seen. > > Also, ->name is used in a number of places if some other host template > members are not provided, i.e. it is practically mandatory. Well, the original plan was that a host implements either ->name or ->info. The first in case the information is static and the latter in case it's dynamic. I think it's a bit complex and would prefer to have just one of them long term or rather just a routine that prints a trivial name, similar to the current ->proc_info.