From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Hannes Reinecke Subject: Re: [Lsf-pc] [LSF/MM TOPIC] [ATTEND] Storage management (API & Library) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2012 14:09:35 +0100 Message-ID: <4F1FFF0F.1030007@suse.de> References: <4F19A981.4080502@redhat.com> <1327157825.2748.5.camel@dabdike.int.hansenpartnership.com> <4F1D8913.1060709@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from cantor2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:59823 "EHLO mx2.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751357Ab2AYNJh (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Jan 2012 08:09:37 -0500 In-Reply-To: <4F1D8913.1060709@redhat.com> Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: tasleson@redhat.com Cc: James Bottomley , lsf-pc@lists.linux-foundation.org, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org On 01/23/2012 05:21 PM, Tony Asleson wrote: > On 01/21/2012 08:57 AM, James Bottomley wrote: [ .. ] >> The second might be what would it take to get vendors interested in >> doing the array plugin glue. > > By providing: > * Permissive license (LGPL) > * Easy to use out of process plug-in support to allow proprietary > plug-ins (IPC is abstracted) > * Language agnostic plug-in support (initial support is C and python) > > We are hoping we can get hardware vendors interested in providing their > own plug-ins. If anyone has additional ideas, we would certainly like > to discuss them. > The various hardware vendors already have the means of managing their arrays, in most cases also providing a CLI. I would be hoping we could draft the API support such that we can use the existing tools, without the need of special plug-ins. Cheers, Hannes