Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 13:02:47 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 13:02:37 -0400 Received: from e32.co.us.ibm.com ([32.97.110.130]:54970 "EHLO e32.bld.us.ibm.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 13:02:29 -0400 Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2001 10:01:28 -0700 From: Mike Anderson To: Benjamin Herrenschmidt Cc: Alan Cox , Linus Torvalds , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Patrick Mochel , Jonathan Lundell Subject: Re: [RFC] New Driver Model for 2.5 Message-ID: <20011024100127.A14124@beaverton.ibm.com> In-Reply-To: <20011024130408.23754@smtp.adsl.oleane.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2i In-Reply-To: <20011024130408.23754@smtp.adsl.oleane.com>; from benh@kernel.crashing.org on Wed, Oct 24, 2001 at 03:04:08PM +0200 X-Operating-System: Linux 2.0.32 on an i486 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Benjamin Herrenschmidt [benh@kernel.crashing.org] wrote: > Now, I'm not sure what would happen with RAID. If we need to have logical > volumes be child of the sd "client", then we have to face the fact that > a given child may have multiple parents... welcome to the power graph ! You do not have to add RAID to need to worry about multiple parents. If we want to correctly represent devices that have multiple paths (i.e twin tailed SCSI, fibre channel, multi-ported devices, etc) we should have a solution to handle this. Some O/S's have moved to directed graphs to address the multiple parent issue. Exposing only one block / character device per real physical device would reduce O/S resources (major / minors, structs) and provide a single request queue. The current model of a scsi_device having a single parent and being attached to the scsi_host host_queue has made adding multi-path support to Linux below the SCSI lower level driver difficult. > But do we really need logical volumes to be part of the PM tree or > can blocking of requests at the sd layer be enough ? Remember we are > in pass2, we have already done memory allocation, we are supposed to > no longer swap nor do any disk/storage related activity. > > A tricky issue indeed... > > > Ben. -Mike -- Michael Anderson andmike@us.ibm.com - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/