mfi(4)/mrsas(4): Set sysctl name for driver versions consistently
Needs ReviewPublic
Actions

Authored by michaelo on Fri, Mar 27, 5:19 PM.

Details

Reviewers

ziaee
emaste
imp
avg

Summary

Instead of printing the driver version over and over again if multiple
controllers are used, set a sysctl name for the used driver version.

MFC after: 3 days

Diff Detail

Repository

rG FreeBSD src repository

Lint

Lint Skipped

Unit

Tests Skipped

Build Status

Buildable 71743
Build 68626: arc lint + arc unit

Event Timeline

michaelo requested review of this revision.Fri, Mar 27, 5:19 PM

michaelo created this revision.

Harbormaster completed remote builds in B71743: Diff 174385.Fri, Mar 27, 5:19 PM

5348269199299646901.jpg (960×1 px, 84 KB)

5348269199299646902.jpg (960×1 px, 138 KB)

Tried live in action.

michaelo mentioned this in D54519: mfi(4)/mrsas(4): Print driver versions consistently.Fri, Mar 27, 5:23 PM

Any comments?

it seems more common through the tree to just use "version" here, e.g kern.version or hw.nvidia.version.

In D56110#1287717, @ziaee wrote:

it seems more common through the tree to just use "version" here, e.g kern.version or hw.nvidia.version.

That's a good point. What to do with the already existing name for mrsas? Add a new one and deprecate the old one in < 16?

I checked other Broadcom/AVAGO/LSI drivers (mpr, mpt). They all use "driver_version". So I think they should be either consistently "driver_version" or "version".

Good point. We should probably keep it consistent with those. I think aligning all of them to be more similar should probably be considered over the mailing list and in a different revision, if we decide to go down that route. Should we RELNOTES: yes or discuss this with others?

In D56110#1287730, @ziaee wrote:

Good point. We should probably keep it consistent with those. I think aligning all of them to be more similar should probably be considered over the mailing list and in a different revision, if we decide to go down that route. Should we RELNOTES: yes or discuss this with others?

I'd at least move it to a separate revision and keep it out of scope of this review. I'd raise a new review next week for all Broadcom/AVAGO/LSI drivers.

@ziaee, given the conditions: Is this one good as it is?