From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Luben Tuikov Subject: Re: [PATCH] add transport class symlink to device object Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2005 09:41:26 -0400 Message-ID: <4301ED06.1020209@adaptec.com> References: <9BB4DECD4CFE6D43AA8EA8D768ED51C201AD39@xbl3.ma.emulex.com> <1124154494.5089.86.camel@mulgrave> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from magic.adaptec.com ([216.52.22.17]:1486 "EHLO magic.adaptec.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S965217AbVHPNlb (ORCPT ); Tue, 16 Aug 2005 09:41:31 -0400 In-Reply-To: <1124154494.5089.86.camel@mulgrave> Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: James Bottomley Cc: James.Smart@Emulex.Com, matthew@wil.cx, Greg KH , Andrew Morton , SCSI Mailing List , Linux Kernel , Alan Cox , Russell King On 08/15/05 21:08, James Bottomley wrote: >>Think if SCSI used this same style of representation. For example, >>if there was no scsi target device entity, but class entities did >>exist and they just pointed back to the scsi host device entry. > > > Yes, it's theoretically possible to have had SCSI do this. We didn't do > it at the time because class_devices didn't exist when the SCSI tree was > first put together. It would, however, have rather put the mockers on > doing transport classes since class devices can't point at other class > devices. Well, so be it. All in all, I'd like to point out that James S has a very good and valid point, as anyone trained in SCSI protocols can see. >>My vote is to make the multiplexor instantiate each serial line >>as a separate device. > > That's a choice that's up to the maintainer of the serial driver ... I think James S, was making a point of concept. Maybe SCSI Core can learn from this? Luben