From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff Garzik Subject: Re: generating a Linux WWN? Date: Sat, 06 Oct 2007 11:42:28 -0400 Message-ID: <4707ACE4.4040002@garzik.org> References: <1191622146.3475.51.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20071005.151131.125883267.davem@davemloft.net> <1191622488.3475.54.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20071005.151711.112302061.davem@davemloft.net> <1191679870.3338.17.camel@localhost.localdomain> <47079D64.3070000@garzik.org> <1191683096.3338.29.camel@localhost.localdomain> <4707A854.1080309@garzik.org> <1191684797.3338.31.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from srv5.dvmed.net ([207.36.208.214]:35135 "EHLO mail.dvmed.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1759624AbXJFPnb (ORCPT ); Sat, 6 Oct 2007 11:43:31 -0400 In-Reply-To: <1191684797.3338.31.camel@localhost.localdomain> Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: James Bottomley Cc: David Miller , ltuikov@yahoo.com, lydianconcepts@gmail.com, mdr@sgi.com, James.Smart@emulex.com, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org James Bottomley wrote: > On Sat, 2007-10-06 at 11:23 -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote: >> James Bottomley wrote: >>> If you remember Rusty's guide to interfaces, this is a level 14 easy to >>> misuse interface: "The obvious use is wrong"; since the obvious use is >>> to put it in module parameters and have the problem go away (for >>> now ...). Actually, I could be harsher and say it's level 17 "There's >>> no correct use" because statistically every time you use it, you expose >>> yourself to potential duplicate WWNs. >> >> Now that you have said "there's no correct use" you have managed to >> logic yourself into silly-land. >> >> That is utterly specious logic when duplicate WWNs are quite unlikely, >> and furthermore -- as demonstrated by use in network drivers -- use of >> the feature itself is not the common case. >> >> Field experience directly contradicts this entire line of reasoning. > > OK, give me your use case. I already have, in this thread. Jeff