Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Tue, 27 Apr 2021 07:42:14 +0300
From:   Dan Aloni <dan@kernelim.com>
To:     Olga Kornievskaia <olga.kornievskaia@gmail.com>
Cc:     trond.myklebust@hammerspace.com, anna.schumaker@netapp.com,
        linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 09/13] sunrpc: add a symlink from rpc-client directory
 to the xprt_switch
Message-ID: <20210427044214.vlbmbfdh5dpq4vhl@gmail.com>
References: <20210426171947.99233-1-olga.kornievskaia@gmail.com>
 <20210426171947.99233-10-olga.kornievskaia@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20210426171947.99233-10-olga.kornievskaia@gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Apr 26, 2021 at 01:19:43PM -0400, Olga Kornievskaia wrote:
> From: Olga Kornievskaia <kolga@netapp.com>
> 
> An rpc client uses a transport switch and one ore more transports
> associated with that switch. Since transports are shared among
> rpc clients, create a symlink into the xprt_switch directory
> instead of duplicating entries under each rpc client.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Olga Kornievskaia <kolga@netapp.com>
>
>..
> @@ -188,6 +204,11 @@ void rpc_sysfs_client_destroy(struct rpc_clnt *clnt)
>  	struct rpc_sysfs_client *rpc_client = clnt->cl_sysfs;
>  
>  	if (rpc_client) {
> +		char name[23];
> +
> +		snprintf(name, sizeof(name), "switch-%d",
> +			 rpc_client->xprt_switch->xps_id);
> +		sysfs_remove_link(&rpc_client->kobject, name);

Hi Olga,

If a client can use a single switch, shouldn't the name of the symlink
be just "switch"? This is to be consistent with other symlinks in
`sysfs` such as the ones in block layer, for example in my
`/sys/block/sda`:

    bdi -> ../../../../../../../../../../../virtual/bdi/8:0
    device -> ../../../5:0:0:0


-- 
Dan Aloni