From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: James Bottomley Subject: Re: scsi "target1:0:0" Date: 16 Nov 2004 10:33:13 -0600 Message-ID: <1100622800.2574.41.camel@mulgrave> References: <1100622096.8606.104.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from stat16.steeleye.com ([209.192.50.48]:45029 "EHLO hancock.sc.steeleye.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262046AbUKPQdY (ORCPT ); Tue, 16 Nov 2004 11:33:24 -0500 In-Reply-To: <1100622096.8606.104.camel@localhost.localdomain> Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: Kay Sievers Cc: SCSI Mailing List On Tue, 2004-11-16 at 10:21, Kay Sievers wrote: > We got an additional directory in the /devices directory which > changed: > /devices/pci0000:00/0000:00:1d.1/usb3/3-1/3-1:1.0/host1/1:0:0:0 > > to: > /devices/pci0000:00/0000:00:1d.1/usb3/3-1/3-1:1.0/host1/target1:0:0/1:0:0:0 > > The inserted "target1:0:0" is _not_ backed by any "bus" or "class" device > and therefore breaks the logic of HAL to bring the devices together by > its parent. (We also don't get hotplug events for the "target*" device at > creation time) Could you explain what specific problem this causes. You do get a hotplug for the LUNs; a target is simply an additional node in the tree. > Is this intentional and we can not expected a straight chain of devices > anymore like it always was? Shouldn't there be a "class" device to have > it consistent again. Essentially yes. a target is simply a LUN container. It has no real existence (it's created when the first lun is encountered and destroyed when the last LUN is removed). It's job is really to hold parameters that apply to all LUNs. James