Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 12 Jan 1998 08:10:32 +1100 | From | Richard Gooch <> | Subject | Re: devfs |
| |
Mitch Adair writes: > > > > On Sun, 11 Jan 1998, Richard Gooch wrote: > > > > This allows then to stay compatible with their naming sheme but has the > > > > drawback of dropping support for LUNs. This only works properly for the > > > > special case of the SSAs since you only have disk drives in them. > > > > > > > > However I do not think that we should make the same mistake as them > > > > and cut ourselves off from supporting multi LUN devices. > > > > > > Agreed! Considering this, I'm open to alternative naming schemes, but > > > only if they preserve the information. > > > > The easiest would be to add a field so that it looks like the following: > > > > cCbBtTdDsS > > > > <C> == controller > > <B> == bus/channel on controller > > <T> == target (ID) > > <D> == LUN > > <S> == slice/partition > > > Yes, *please* use this layout. Those of us who've been dainbramaged by > our exposure to Solaris would really appreciate it, I think. :)
So how about my original scheme:
sd_hHcCiIlLpP
<H> -> host controller <C> -> SCSI channel/bus <I> -> SCSI target ID <L> -> LUN <P> -> partition
> I think devfs is a great idea, good work.
Thanks.
Regards,
Richard....
| |