From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/10][RFC] linux-iscsi driver Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 09:59:20 +0000 Message-ID: <20050111095920.GA18119@infradead.org> References: <41E30855.9050203@cs.wisc.edu> <20050110232442.GB10138@infradead.org> <1105404318.4477.18.camel@mulgrave> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from [213.146.154.40] ([213.146.154.40]:27279 "EHLO pentafluge.infradead.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262664AbVAKJ7V (ORCPT ); Tue, 11 Jan 2005 04:59:21 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1105404318.4477.18.camel@mulgrave> Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: James Bottomley Cc: Christoph Hellwig , Mike Christie , SCSI Mailing List On Mon, Jan 10, 2005 at 06:45:18PM -0600, James Bottomley wrote: > On Mon, 2005-01-10 at 23:24 +0000, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > Can you kill the ugly iscsi-sfnet name? We also don't call out networking > > code ipv4-swansea ;-) Simple iscsi should be enough, or if you think that's > > confusing vs driver for hardware offload cards maybe sw-iscsi. > > Please not that can of worms again. > > For the time being I think iscsi-sfnet will do since there's still one > other possible linux iscsi stack around. And we would probably have > called our networking code ipv4-swansea if we also had an ipv4-bsd or > something else one could use. > > In the long run, there will be only a single iscsi driver, and it can be > renamed as such, but in the short term we're not ready to choose. I disagree. We have been concentrating on this driver for a long time, everyone whoe thinks his driver should have been _the_ software initiator should have complained for a long time.