[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20101006111621O.fujita.tomonori@lab.ntt.co.jp>
Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2010 11:21:46 +0900
From: FUJITA Tomonori <fujita.tomonori@....ntt.co.jp>
To: nab@...ux-iscsi.org
Cc: linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
fujita.tomonori@....ntt.co.jp, michaelc@...wisc.edu, hch@....de,
hare@...e.de, James.Bottomley@...e.de, axboe@...nel.dk,
bharrosh@...asas.com
Subject: Re: [RFC v2 00/21] TCM Core and TCM_Loop patches for v2.6.37
On Wed, 22 Sep 2010 15:48:22 -0700
"Nicholas A. Bellinger" <nab@...ux-iscsi.org> wrote:
> drivers/Kconfig | 2 +
> drivers/Makefile | 1 +
> drivers/target/Kbuild | 30 +
> drivers/target/Kconfig | 36 +
Why do we need a new place for the target stuff? This could be used
for non scsi protocl?
We had the similar discussion when I put stgt to mainline but we
concluded that under drivers/scsi is the best place.
I don't like to put ibmvscsi driver under something like
drivers/target/tcm_ibmvscsit because ibmvscsi needs to include some
files under drivers/scsi/ibmvscsi/. It's more reasonable to put the
driver there.
Can we change the name, TCM (Target Core Mod), to something more
informative? I think that "Core Mod" is really pointless.
This will be the mainline scsi target feature so why can't we name
the files and modules in more appropriate way?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists