* Re: scsi_devinfo: devices and pattern matching
2017-12-16 13:31 scsi_devinfo: devices and pattern matching Xose Vazquez Perez
@ 2017-12-18 8:36 ` Hannes Reinecke
0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: Hannes Reinecke @ 2017-12-18 8:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Xose Vazquez Perez, Alan Stern, Bart Van Assche, Martin Wilck,
Martin Petersen, James E . J . Bottomley, linux-scsi
On 12/16/2017 02:31 PM, Xose Vazquez Perez wrote:
> Hi,
>
> After last pattern matching changes, maybe some entries should be revised:
>
>
> Empty strings(current meaning?):
> {"", "Scanner", "1.80", BLIST_NOLUN}, /* responds to all lun */
> {"Promise", "", NULL, BLIST_SPARSELUN},
> {"HP", "C1790A", "", BLIST_NOLUN}, /* scanjet iip */
> {"HP", "C2500A", "", BLIST_NOLUN}, /* scanjet iicx */
>
We would need to check what the hardware actually returns, whether it
_really_ is an empty string or whether it's meant to be a catch-all entry.
>
> Overlapping(?) strings(remove one???):
> {"DELL", "PV660F", NULL, BLIST_SPARSELUN},
> {"DELL", "PV660F PSEUDO", NULL, BLIST_SPARSELUN},>
> {"NRC", "MBR-7", NULL, BLIST_FORCELUN | BLIST_SINGLELUN},
> {"NRC", "MBR-7.4", NULL, BLIST_FORCELUN | BLIST_SINGLELUN},
>
> {"Promise", "", NULL, BLIST_SPARSELUN},
> {"Promise", "VTrak E610f", NULL, BLIST_SPARSELUN | BLIST_NO_RSOC},
>
That is by design, and nothing to worry about, as the specific entries
are subsets of the more generic entries.
>
> Odd "revision level" string(is it right? EOT?):
> {"SEAGATE", "ST157N", "\004|j", BLIST_NOLUN},
>
>
We might need to check what the ST157N actually returns; if we can't I
fear the entry need to stay as it is.
> Duplicate strings(They should be merged):
> {"TEXEL", "CD-ROM", "1.06", BLIST_BORKEN},
> {"TEXEL", "CD-ROM", "1.06", BLIST_NOLUN},
>
Ah. Good point. Yes, it should be merged.
>
> Keep in mind, for future patches, that there are regex metacharacters(!!):
> {"IOMEGA", "Io20S *F", NULL, BLIST_KEY},
> {"INSITE", "Floptical F*8I", NULL, BLIST_KEY},
> {"DELL", "PSEUDO DEVICE .", NULL, BLIST_SPARSELUN}, /* Dell PV 530F */
>
Hmm. Yes, but again we need to validate this with real hardware before
making any changes here.
>
> For homogeneity reasons, should "*" revision level be replaced by NULL?
>
>
> And the current pattern matching algorithm should be described clearer, right
> now it's a bit confused.
>
I'll be sending out a blktest entry for the devinfo string matching;
that will give us a proper regression test suite.
Cheers,
Hannes
--
Dr. Hannes Reinecke Teamlead Storage & Networking
hare@suse.de +49 911 74053 688
SUSE LINUX GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg
GF: F. Imendörffer, J. Smithard, J. Guild, D. Upmanyu, G. Norton
HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg)
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread