[stgt] [PATCH 1/1] tgtd: Patch to add bsoflags options o tgtd.

[FUJITA Tomonori]

On Tue, 29 Jun 2010 12:16:55 -0300
Daniel Henrique Debonzi <debonzi at linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:

> > As we discussed, "--bsoflags" can't be applied to all the bs modes
> > equally (e.g. bs_aio can use only O_DIRECT). But I guess that creating
> > multiple options such as --bsoflags_rw, --bsoflags_aio, etc is too
> > overdoing.
> > 
> > I'll take the approach add only "--bsoflags". --bsoflags="async
> > direct" is not consistent with the other options. Let's use "," like
> > --bsoflags="async,direct".
> 
> I can't use "," because it is the separator used for the options 
> --bstype,--bsoflags,etc. If I use it, the second parameter if existente 

Duh,

> (like sync,direct) will not be used right. I used ":" once it is also 
> used for portals (IP:port).

Looks odd a bit. "address:port" is the common expression so it's fine
though.

But I don't think that many people use this option so I don't care
much.


> > I don't think that we need "none" or "async". Let's support "sync" and
> > "direct".
> 
> The async option doesn't exist. It only have sync and direct. The none 
> option is available only for update. Lets say someone created a target 
> with sync, and for some reason he doesn't want sync anymore. He can
> 
> tgtadm --op update --mode logicalunit --tid 1 --lun 1 --params online=0
> tgtadm --op update --mode logicalunit --tid 1 --lun 1 --params\ 
> bsoflags="none"
> 
> to clean up the bsoflags.
> 
> I put this changes in a separate patch, so you can drop it if you think 
> it is not necessary.

I really don't think that we need to support 'updating bsoflags'. You
can remove a device and add it again with a new flags.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe stgt" in
the body of a message to majordomo at vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html