From: Chandra Seetharaman <sekharan@us.ibm.com>
To: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com>
Cc: Kay Sievers <kay.sievers@vrfy.org>,
linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, michaelc@cs.wisc.edu,
Peter Jones <pjones@redhat.com>, Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] scsi_dh: Add modalias support for SCSI targets
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2009 14:52:43 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1239832363.1196.5.camel@chandra-ubuntu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <49DCBDE6.5000806@redhat.com>
Hi James,
Are your concerns answered ?
Hannes, Kay,
Is the description related to bus notify BIND DEVICE issue clear now ?
Please respond :)
chandra
On Wed, 2009-04-08 at 11:08 -0400, Peter Jones wrote:
> On 04/07/2009 04:59 PM, James Bottomley wrote:
> > On Fri, 2009-04-03 at 15:43 -0700, Chandra Seetharaman wrote:
> >> Hi James,
> >>
> >> Do you still have any concerns (after Peter's response) ?
> >
> > Yes, the basic concerns still remain:
> >
> > 1. You're forcing autoload now even if the user isn't running
> > dm ... this is going to cause problems with non-dm based path
> > handlers
>
> (Chandra covered this pretty well, so I'll leave it be.)
>
> > 2. autoloading in this fashion is essentially trying to work around
> > a problem in the initrd tools. The kernel isn't the right place
> > to implement the fix.
>
> This seems backwards to me. It's not trying to work around a problem
> in the initrd tools; it's trying to avoid creating one by making this
> subsystem unlike others.
>
> The point of having modaliases is to allow the kernel to announce that it's
> got a hardware device and notify the userland that appropriate modules should
> be loaded. That's exactly what we've done here. What we're trying to avoid
> in the initrd tools is having to have a special handler for this subsystem;
> instead, we'd much rather use the generic mechanism that already exists for
> this purpose.
>
> > The risks of this approach seem very high, and the rewards pretty small.
>
> Can you please explain what the high risks you're thinking of are? I'm not
> clear on what undesirable behavior you expect to occur.
>
> The reward is that scsi targets behave exactly like most other types of
> hardware and kernel modules in this regard, without having to write special
> probing for this subsystem in the userland and special handling for loading
> these modules. That's a pretty big win for maintainability.
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-04-15 21:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 39+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-03-18 1:36 [PATCH 0/3] scsi_dh: Make scsi device handler modules automatically inserted Chandra Seetharaman
2009-03-18 1:36 ` [PATCH 1/3] scsi_dh: Add modalias support for SCSI targets Chandra Seetharaman
2009-03-18 13:44 ` Konrad Rzeszutek
2009-03-18 14:02 ` James Bottomley
2009-03-18 14:36 ` Konrad Rzeszutek
2009-03-18 18:30 ` Kay Sievers
2009-03-18 19:18 ` Chandra Seetharaman
2009-03-19 18:54 ` Chandra Seetharaman
2009-03-20 18:24 ` Peter Jones
2009-03-23 22:13 ` Chandra Seetharaman
2009-04-03 22:43 ` Chandra Seetharaman
2009-04-07 20:59 ` James Bottomley
2009-04-07 23:41 ` Chandra Seetharaman
2009-04-08 15:08 ` Peter Jones
2009-04-15 21:52 ` Chandra Seetharaman [this message]
2009-04-16 15:18 ` Hannes Reinecke
2009-04-07 23:22 ` Hannes Reinecke
2009-04-07 23:50 ` Chandra Seetharaman
2009-04-08 5:15 ` Kay Sievers
2009-04-08 19:13 ` Chandra Seetharaman
2009-03-18 18:47 ` James Bottomley
2009-03-18 19:12 ` Chandra Seetharaman
2009-03-18 20:09 ` James Bottomley
2009-03-18 20:24 ` Kay Sievers
2009-03-18 20:26 ` James Bottomley
2009-03-18 20:59 ` Chandra Seetharaman
2009-03-20 17:41 ` Peter Jones
2009-03-18 1:36 ` [PATCH 2/3] scsi_dh: Change scsi device handler modules to utilize modalias Chandra Seetharaman
2009-03-18 13:46 ` Konrad Rzeszutek
2009-03-18 15:43 ` Stefan Richter
2009-03-18 17:25 ` Chandra Seetharaman
2009-03-18 17:50 ` Stefan Richter
2009-03-18 18:18 ` Kay Sievers
2009-03-18 19:44 ` Stefan Richter
2009-03-18 18:50 ` Chandra Seetharaman
2009-03-18 19:46 ` Stefan Richter
2009-03-18 1:36 ` [PATCH 3/3] scsi_dh: Workaround a race condition in module insertion Chandra Seetharaman
2009-03-18 11:31 ` [PATCH 0/3] scsi_dh: Make scsi device handler modules automatically inserted Hannes Reinecke
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2009-04-27 18:06 Chandra Seetharaman
2009-04-27 18:06 ` [PATCH 1/3] scsi_dh: Add modalias support for SCSI targets Chandra Seetharaman
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=1239832363.1196.5.camel@chandra-ubuntu \
--to=sekharan@us.ibm.com \
--cc=James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com \
--cc=hare@suse.de \
--cc=kay.sievers@vrfy.org \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=michaelc@cs.wisc.edu \
--cc=pjones@redhat.com \
--cc=sekharan@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox