[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190725174032.GA27818@kroah.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2019 19:40:32 +0200
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: Logan Gunthorpe <logang@...tatee.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-block@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
Sagi Grimberg <sagi@...mberg.me>,
Keith Busch <kbusch@...nel.org>, Jens Axboe <axboe@...com>,
Chaitanya Kulkarni <Chaitanya.Kulkarni@....com>,
Max Gurtovoy <maxg@...lanox.com>,
Stephen Bates <sbates@...thlin.com>,
Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 02/16] chardev: introduce cdev_get_by_path()
On Thu, Jul 25, 2019 at 11:23:21AM -0600, Logan Gunthorpe wrote:
> cdev_get_by_path() attempts to retrieve a struct cdev from
> a path name. It is analagous to blkdev_get_by_path().
>
> This will be necessary to create a nvme_ctrl_get_by_path()to
> support NVMe-OF passthru.
Ick, why? Why would a cdev have a "pathname"?
What is "NVMe-OF passthru"? Why does a char device node have anything
to do with NVMe?
We have way too many ways to abuse cdevs today, my long-term-wish has
always been to clean this interface up to make it more sane and unified,
and get rid of the "outliers" (all created at the time for a good
reason, that's not the problem.) But to add "just one more" seems
really odd to me.
thanks,
greg k-h
Powered by blists - more mailing lists