[libvirt] [PATCH 1/4] docs: Document the new vHBA/NPIV params for storage

[Martin Kletzander]

On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 07:25:52AM -0500, John Ferlan wrote:
>Commit id 'bb74a7ffe' forgot to adjust the storage docs to describe the
>new fields.
>
>Signed-off-by: John Ferlan <jferlan at redhat.com>
>---
> docs/formatstorage.html.in | 17 +++++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+)
>
>diff --git a/docs/formatstorage.html.in b/docs/formatstorage.html.in
>index a7273ed..f6887ae 100644
>--- a/docs/formatstorage.html.in
>+++ b/docs/formatstorage.html.in
>@@ -237,6 +237,23 @@
>             the scsi_hostN of some existing storage pool.
>             <span class="since">Since 1.0.4</span>
>           </dd>
>+          <dt><code>parent_wwnn</code> and <code>parent_wwpn</code></dt>
>+          <dd>Instead of the <code>parent</code> to specify which scsi_host
>+            to use by name, it's possible to provide the wwnn and wwpn of
>+            the parent to be used for the vHBA in order to ensure that
>+            between reboots or after a hardware configuration change that
>+            the scsi_host parent name doesn't change. Both the parent_wwnn
>+            and parent_wwpn must be provided.
>+            <span class="since">Since 3.0.0</span>
>+          </dd>
>+          <dt><code>parent_fabric_wwn</code></dt>
>+          <dd>Instead of the <code>parent</code> to specify which scsi_host
>+            to use by name, it's possible to provide the fabric_wwn on which
>+            the scsi_host exists. This provides flexibility for choosing
>+            a scsi_host that may be available on the fabric rather than
>+            requiring a specific parent by wwnn or wwpn to be available.
>+            <span class="since">Since 3.0.0</span>
>+          </dd>
>           <dt><code>managed</code></dt>
>           <dd>An optional attribute to instruct the SCSI storage backend to
>             manage destroying the vHBA when the pool is destroyed. For
>--
>2.7.4
>

ACK, safe for freeze (since it's docs).  Have you seen this [1] patch?
I think I understand it righ, but since you implemented it, it'd be nice
to have your input on that as well.

[1] https://www.redhat.com/archives/libvir-list/2017-January/msg00519.html

>--
>libvir-list mailing list
>libvir-list at redhat.com
>https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/libvir-list/attachments/20170113/d80f2484/attachment-0001.sig>