Re: [PATCH 10/11] LED: Add IDE disk activity LED trigger

[Jens Axboe]

On Tue, Jan 31 2006, Richard Purdie wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On Tue, 2006-01-31 at 15:46 +0100, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
> > 
> > Why cannot existing block layer hook be used for this?
> 
> The trigger is supposed to be reflecting actual hardware activity, not
> block layer activity.
> 
> I'll experiment with the feasibility of the block later as I've always
> been uneasy about the hooks into the lower level layers. There are a
> number of issues to consider though.
> 
> 1. The block layer isn't always aware of device activity (eg. flash
> block erasing in mtd devices) (is this the case for IDE?).
> 
> 2. Default trigger naming becomes problematic for led devices. Currently
> an MMC card reader's LED could set its trigger to say "mmc-disk" and end
> up with some kind of sensible activity light. (ignoring the more than
> one card reader case where all the lights would be synced :).
> 
> A potential solution would be to add individual gendisk triggers by
> hooking add_disk/del_disk. The MMC read would presumably know its
> major/minor number before registering its LED. 
> 
> I'm not sure how to intercept disk activity for a given gendisk offhand.
> There is also a question of where the led_trigger pointers end up.
> struct gendisk may or may not be acceptable.
> 
> 3. Matching something like all IDE disks becomes hard (and is actually
> more desirable than individual devices at times - see below). 
> 
> At first glance a potential solution would be to hook
> register_blkdev/unregister_blkdev and create yet more triggers but where
> do you hook the activity? There is no data structure the led trigger
> pointer can be part of either.
> 
> These solutions are going to end up with a lot of unused led triggers on
> any given system. 

Perhaps a generic solution isn't feasible, because this isn't really a
generic problem. The LED stuff has very limited use - you mention
embedded platforms, perhaps they should just be doing this on their own?

Generally I'm finding a hard time justifying an LED api, honestly. It
just feels like one of those things where the actual abstraction ends up
being a lot bigger than code needed. Abstracting and creating an API
isn't always useful.

-- 
Jens Axboe

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/