From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [Lsf-pc] [LSF/MM TOPIC] [ATTEND] Storage management (API & Library) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2012 12:42:24 -0500 Message-ID: <20120125174224.GA12620@infradead.org> References: <4F19A981.4080502@redhat.com> <1327157825.2748.5.camel@dabdike.int.hansenpartnership.com> <4F1D8913.1060709@redhat.com> <4F1FFF0F.1030007@suse.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from 173-166-109-252-newengland.hfc.comcastbusiness.net ([173.166.109.252]:54094 "EHLO bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756429Ab2AYRm2 (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Jan 2012 12:42:28 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4F1FFF0F.1030007@suse.de> Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: Hannes Reinecke Cc: tasleson@redhat.com, James Bottomley , lsf-pc@lists.linux-foundation.org, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 02:09:35PM +0100, Hannes Reinecke wrote: > The various hardware vendors already have the means of managing their > arrays, in most cases also providing a CLI. > I would be hoping we could draft the API support such that we can > use the existing tools, without the need of special plug-ins. Wrapping tools from libraries is more of a last resort than a proper solution. But if we can't get better APIs that's probably what we will have to resort to if vendors don't cooperate.