From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Luben Tuikov Subject: Re: generating a Linux WWN? Date: Mon, 8 Oct 2007 11:42:18 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <184001.11168.qm@web31805.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <4707A854.1080309@garzik.org> Reply-To: ltuikov@yahoo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Return-path: Received: from web31805.mail.mud.yahoo.com ([68.142.207.68]:31274 "HELO web31805.mail.mud.yahoo.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1753932AbXJHSmT (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Oct 2007 14:42:19 -0400 In-Reply-To: <4707A854.1080309@garzik.org> Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: Jeff Garzik , James Bottomley Cc: David Miller , ltuikov@yahoo.com, lydianconcepts@gmail.com, mdr@sgi.com, James.Smart@emulex.com, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org --- Jeff Garzik wrote: > James Bottomley wrote: > > If you remember Rusty's guide to interfaces, this is a level 14 easy to > > misuse interface: "The obvious use is wrong"; since the obvious use is > > to put it in module parameters and have the problem go away (for > > now ...). Actually, I could be harsher and say it's level 17 "There's > > no correct use" because statistically every time you use it, you expose > > yourself to potential duplicate WWNs. > > > Now that you have said "there's no correct use" you have managed to > logic yourself into silly-land. > > That is utterly specious logic when duplicate WWNs are quite unlikely, > and furthermore -- as demonstrated by use in network drivers -- use of > the feature itself is not the common case. > > Field experience directly contradicts this entire line of reasoning. You have SAS SAN's field experience? Luben