[Open-FCoE] [RFC PATCH] libhbalinux: Comment out the code of finding device_id, vendor_id, etc.
steve.ma at intel.com
Wed Apr 15 22:13:00 UTC 2009
>From: Love, Robert W
>Sent: Wednesday, April 15, 2009 1:12 PM
>To: Ma, Steve; devel at open-fcoe.org
>Subject: RE: [Open-FCoE] [RFC PATCH] libhbalinux: Comment out the code of
>finding device_id, vendor_id, etc.
>Steve Ma wrote:
>> vendor_id, device_id, subsystem_vendor_id, subsystem_device_id,
>> device_class are obtained using the libpciaccess routines. the code
>> to obtain these items from the sysfs are duplicate of the same
>> effort. Also the code does not work. This patch is to comment it out
>> the code of accessing the sysfs. ---
>Am I correct that the reason we wouldn't remove the libpciaccess
>routines instead is that netdev based HBAs don't expose correct vendor
>information in the fc_host info?
Yes, that is correct.
>This might be OK for now, but it seems that we'd want to get that info
>from netdev or another way since the fc_host's info in sysfs is a nice
>generic place to get info.
>Also, why comment out and not remove?
Someday when we find out how to get those info from sysfs, we might still
Need this code with some modifications. That is why not to remove it.
>> lport.c | 2 ++
>> 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>> diff --git a/lport.c b/lport.c
>> index 468e72e..7b46f83 100644
>> --- a/lport.c
>> +++ b/lport.c
>> @@ -314,6 +314,7 @@ sysfs_scan(struct dirent *dp, void *arg)
>> snprintf(buf, sizeof(buf), "fcoe:%s", ifname);
>> ap->ad_name = strdup(buf);
>> +#if 0
>> /* Get vendor_id */
>> rc = sa_sys_read_u32(hba_dir, "vendor", &hba_info.vendor_id);
>> @@ -331,6 +332,7 @@ sysfs_scan(struct dirent *dp, void *arg)
>> /* Get device_class */
>> rc = sa_sys_read_u32(hba_dir, "class", &hba_info.device_class);
>> hba_info.device_class = hba_info.device_class>>8;
>> * Get Hardware Information via PCI Library
>> devel mailing list
>> devel at open-fcoe.org
More information about the devel