All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@oracle.com>
To: James.Smart@Emulex.Com
Cc: scsi <linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>,
	jejb <James.Bottomley@SteelEye.com>, akpm <akpm@osdl.org>
Subject: Re: [Ubuntu PATCH] lpfc: Add missing proc_name entry to scsi_host_table
Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 15:05:34 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4491D9AE.1080607@oracle.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4491BE0A.8030209@emulex.com>

James Smart wrote:
> Is this destined for upstream (2.6.16 or later) ? If it is, I don't see why
> this change is needed, as:
> - As lpfc doesn't support /proc interface, it never initializes the fields
>   in the host template, so proc_info and proc_name will be null.
> - scsi_proc_hostdir_add() validates that sht->proc_info is non-null before
>   attempting to use sht->proc_name.
> - the only reference in scsi_sysfs properly deals with a null name pointer
>   (e.g. the proc_name is an empty string). Which seems the right thing to
>   do if there is no proc entry.
> 
> That said - the change is trivial, so I really don't mind if it goes in.

Hi James,

It's not necessarily "destined".  It's in the Ubuntu kernel tree and I'm
in the process of scrubbing thru their kernel tree to see what (if anything)
should/could be considered for adding to the mainline kernel tree.

If their patch justification is incorrect, then it's definitely not
destined.

Thanks,
~Randy

> Randy Dunlap wrote:
>> [UBUNTU:drivers/scsi/lpfc] Add missing proc_name entry to 
>> scsi_host_table.
>>
>> http://www.kernel.org/git/?p=linux/kernel/git/bcollins/ubuntu-dapper.git;a=commitdiff;h=8e3174d462c06d45138ff7a9a25667a7347ff5ab 
>>
>>
>> According to a few people, the scsi proc interface should die, but sysfs
>> still uses some proc_* entries from scsi_host_table.
>>
>> The Emulex driver needs to export at least proc_name.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Fabio M. Di Nitto <fabbione@ubuntu.com>
>> ---
>> drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_scsi.c |    1 +
>> 1 files changed, 1 insertion(+)
>>
>> --- linux-2617-rc6g7.orig/drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_scsi.c
>> +++ linux-2617-rc6g7/drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_scsi.c
>> @@ -1269,6 +1269,7 @@ struct scsi_host_template lpfc_template     
>> .slave_alloc        = lpfc_slave_alloc,
>>     .slave_configure    = lpfc_slave_configure,
>>     .slave_destroy        = lpfc_slave_destroy,
>> +    .proc_name        = "lpfc",
>>     .this_id        = -1,
>>     .sg_tablesize        = LPFC_SG_SEG_CNT,
>>     .cmd_per_lun        = LPFC_CMD_PER_LUN,
>>
>>


      reply	other threads:[~2006-06-15 21:05 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2006-06-15 20:00 [Ubuntu PATCH] lpfc: Add missing proc_name entry to scsi_host_table Randy Dunlap
2006-06-15 20:07 ` James Smart
2006-06-15 22:05   ` Randy Dunlap [this message]

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=4491D9AE.1080607@oracle.com \
    --to=randy.dunlap@oracle.com \
    --cc=James.Bottomley@SteelEye.com \
    --cc=James.Smart@Emulex.Com \
    --cc=akpm@osdl.org \
    --cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.