Re: [example PATCH - not for applying] exclude certain commands

[Patrick Mansfield <patmans@us.ibm.com>]

On Thu, Apr 24, 2003 at 01:59:32PM -0700, Matthew Dharm wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 24, 2003 at 04:20:50PM -0400, James Bottomley wrote:

> > I think the evpd code can be thrown out into user land (where the rules
> > governing how it's used can be much more flexible).  All we really use
> > it for is to get a unique name.  However, even WWN inquiries don't
> > always guarantee even that...
> 
> Well, I'd love to see a patch to do that.  But I seem to recall someone
> being opposed to that idea.... maybe I'm just imagining that.

I wanted it to stay for scsi mid-level multi-path usage, but multi-path
isn't in the kernel, and if multi-path wants to use it in-kernel, we can
carry the deleted code as a patch or better yet use some sort of
user-initiated scanning (maybe not full user scsi scanning for now, just
something that allows synchronized user intervention to get/set id's
between the scsi_scan_host and the scsi_attach_device calls.)

And we want some sort of id for udev, but that can be done in user space.

So kill it before it's too late.

-- Patrick Mansfield