Block a physical property?

[Pierre Ossman]

Pierre Ossman wrote:
> How come 'block' is considered a physical property (a bus even) and not
> a functional property? It seems a bit weird from my point of view. That
> something is block based seems more of a protocol detail than anything else.
> 
> I know the sysfs layout is a but funky concerning block devices, but the
> concensus seem to be that it should be eventually moved to /sys/class/block.
> 
> Also, the block "bus" forgets to set info.bus. ;)
> 

After sleeping on it, I started wondering why we have this namespace at
all. Wouldn't it be better to move block.device into storage? And
major/minor seems a bit linux specific. So it should probably be under
the linux namespace.

Besides, if we have a block namespace, why don't we have a char namespace?


I also noticed that all functional nodes in the HAL tree were missing
info.bus. Could cause some trouble since the spec says it's mandatory. I
suppose they should inherit it from their parent. Which would make
storage.bus obsolete (provided that block goes the way of the dodo).


Just my take on the situation. :)

Rgds
Pierre