From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: James Bottomley Subject: Re: [PATCH] sysfs host name support Date: 09 Feb 2004 11:09:20 -0500 Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org Message-ID: <1076342962.1804.14.camel@mulgrave> References: <20040209155046.GP3944@tpkurt.garloff.de> <20040209160526.A23604@infradead.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from stat1.steeleye.com ([65.114.3.130]:36494 "EHLO hancock.sc.steeleye.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S265203AbUBIQJb (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 Feb 2004 11:09:31 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20040209160526.A23604@infradead.org> List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: Christoph Hellwig Cc: Kurt Garloff , Linux SCSI list On Mon, 2004-02-09 at 11:05, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > name is optional (you can use ->info instead), so please don't export it. > As for proc_name vs module_name - I think we should just export one of them, > I'm pretty open which one. proc_name probably makes more sense. Actually, no, I'd like to see module name as well. We need a more generic than SCSI solution for this, I think, but if you look at most initrd systems, they go through a lot of pattern matching to try to translate the proc name into the module name. This would allow every initrd maker to eliminate those tiresome tables. James