Re: [PATCH v4 15/25] ibnbd: private headers with IBNBD protocol structs and helpers

[Jinpu Wang <jinpu.wang@cloud.ionos.com>]

On Mon, Sep 16, 2019 at 7:25 PM Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org> wrote:
>
> On 9/16/19 7:57 AM, Jinpu Wang wrote:
> >>>> +#define _IBNBD_FILEIO  0
> >>>> +#define _IBNBD_BLOCKIO 1
> >>>> +#define _IBNBD_AUTOIO  2
> >>>>
> >>>> +enum ibnbd_io_mode {
> >>>> +     IBNBD_FILEIO = _IBNBD_FILEIO,
> >>>> +     IBNBD_BLOCKIO = _IBNBD_BLOCKIO,
> >>>> +     IBNBD_AUTOIO = _IBNBD_AUTOIO,
> >>>> +};
> >>>
> >>> Since the IBNBD_* and _IBNBD_* constants have the same numerical value,
> >>> are the former constants really necessary?
>  >>
> >> Seems we can remove _IBNBD_*.
>  >
> > Sorry, checked again,  we defined _IBNBD_* constants to show the right
> > value for def_io_mode description.
> > If we remove the _IBNBD_*, then the modinfo shows:
> > def_io_mode:By default, export devices in blockio(IBNBD_BLOCKIO) or
> > fileio(IBNBD_FILEIO) mode. (default: IBNBD_BLOCKIO (blockio))
> > instead of:
> > parm:           def_io_mode:By default, export devices in blockio(1)
> > or fileio(0) mode. (default: 1 (blockio))
>
> So the user is required to enter def_io_mode as a number? Wouldn't it be
> more friendly towards users to change that parameter from a number into
> a string?
>
Ok, it's a bit more code, will change to allow user to set "blockio"
or "fileio" as string.

Thanks,
Jinpu