From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Patrick Mansfield Subject: Re: Transport Attributes -- attempt#4 Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2004 15:48:01 -0800 Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org Message-ID: <20040120154801.B25713@beaverton.ibm.com> References: <20040120215645.GG15871@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from e4.ny.us.ibm.com ([32.97.182.104]:54502 "EHLO e4.ny.us.ibm.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S263937AbUATXsX (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 Jan 2004 18:48:23 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20040120215645.GG15871@localhost>; from mort@wildopensource.com on Tue, Jan 20, 2004 at 04:56:45PM -0500 List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: Martin Hicks Cc: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, James Bottomley On Tue, Jan 20, 2004 at 04:56:45PM -0500, Martin Hicks wrote: > > Hi again, > > Updated patches against Linus' bk tree from earlier today. The patch > that fixes up the scsi_sysfs.c error path, that was sent out by me on > Jan 16, is required for the core patch to apply cleanly. > > I think I've addressed all the comments from the last round with the > exception of doing Lazy registration of the transport classes. I'm > still not totally convinced that this is really required. It's certainly are not required, but makes it easier to add other transports, and is in line with allocating resources as needed. Making them modules means the code is only loaded when required by an adapter, it is not always loaded with scsi core. We could potentially have iSCSI and maybe others per SCSI standards. Then we have USB, ieee1394, and raid cards that might want to add their own bus and attributes, though these ones might more easily add them via scsi_host attributes. -- Patrick Mansfield