This is an archived copy of the Xen.org mailing list, which we have preserved to ensure that existing links to archives are not broken. The live archive, which contains the latest emails, can be found at http://lists.xen.org/
Home Products Support Community News


[Xen-devel] Re: hv block drivers

To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx>
Subject: [Xen-devel] Re: hv block drivers
From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2010 09:17:42 -0700
Cc: "'virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx'" <virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Hank Janssen <hjanssen@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Delivery-date: Mon, 30 Aug 2010 09:18:33 -0700
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <201008301643.42253.arnd@xxxxxxxx>
List-help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>
List-post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
References: <201008301643.42253.arnd@xxxxxxxx>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv: Gecko/20100806 Fedora/3.1.2-1.fc13 Lightning/1.0b2pre Thunderbird/3.1.2
 On 08/30/2010 07:43 AM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> Hi Hank,
> I wanted to follow up on the block device driver discussion we had at
> LinuxCon, based on some other input I got.
> What most people recommended was to make both the hv scsi and the
> hv ata code scsi device drivers, *not* make them standalone block
> drivers as I originally recommended.
> The main reason for this is consistent naming of the devices. We
> have a lot of user code that can deal with /dev/sd* devices, but
> introducing the /dev/vd* devices for virtio caused a lot of pain
> that you probably shouldn't have to go through.

We're having the same kind of problem with the Xen xvdX device naming. 
For a fully PV system it doesn't matter to much, but when you've got PV
drivers taking the place of a regular emulated hardware device it would
be nice to have a similar device name.

But there isn't a lot of similarity between the Xen block interface and
SCSI beyond the basic block transfer bits, so I was wondering how good a
match it would really be.

Have you investigated making virtio a scsi device?


Xen-devel mailing list

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>