From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Bart Van Assche Subject: Re: [Lsf-pc] [LSF/MM TOPIC] Unifying the LIO and SCST target drivers Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2015 10:36:13 +0100 Message-ID: <54BCD00D.4080603@sandisk.com> References: <54B63F74.2040702@sandisk.com> <20150115090829.GA14154@infradead.org> <54B7E70C.8020304@sandisk.com> <20150119092153.GA8666@infradead.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mail-bn1bon0058.outbound.protection.outlook.com ([157.56.111.58]:45472 "EHLO na01-bn1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751501AbbASJgW (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 Jan 2015 04:36:22 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20150119092153.GA8666@infradead.org> Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: Christoph Hellwig Cc: "lsf-pc@lists.linux-foundation.org" , target-devel , "linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org" , "Nicholas A. Bellinger" On 01/19/15 10:22, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Thu, Jan 15, 2015 at 05:13:00PM +0100, Bart Van Assche wrote: >> My goal is to realize this proposal without adding hooks for out-of-tree >> code in the upstream kernel. What I had in mind is to raise the >> abstraction level of the API between LIO core and target drivers a >> little bit (e.g. by using accessor functions where necessary instead of >> accessing structure members directly) > > That's very much a hook, althiugh a week one. > > Either way I don't think bringing up a very much political topic > without even any code to discuss isn't a very valueable use of our time > slots. A possible approach is that I start implementing a unified SRP target driver and post that driver together with the necessary LIO and SCST core changes before the LSF/MM starts. That could be a helpful starting point for further discussions. Bart.