Luben Tuikov wrote:
But none of the ideas: 64 bit LUN, HCIL removal, etc.,
were accepted with "submit a patch".
I concede this may have been the response in the past. Its not, now.
So you're saying fixing the current SCSI subsystem once *now* costs
more than applying all *future* SCSI fixes to _two_ SCSI subsystems,
handling bug reports for _two_ SCSI subsystems, etc.
I'm saying that the current "old" one is already obsolete,
when all you have is a SAS chip on your mainboard.
All you need is a small, tiny, fast, slim SCSI Core.
Then don't use it at all. Write a block driver, if you really feel we
need two SCSI cores.
Politics: "Nah, whatever you say, specs are *crap* and we'll
do it our way. We are not interested in your way, even if it
were better. Oh, and BTW, REQUEST SENSE clears ACA and LUN
is a u64."
This is a misrepresentation. -We- understand the stuff you have posted.
But you continue to demonstrate that you simply do not understand the
existing SCSI core code.
The SAS transport class supports commonality across all SAS
implementations. This includes both MPT and Adaptec 94xx.
SAS transport class + libsas supports software implementations of SAS,
including transport layer management. This includes Adaptec 94xx but
NOT MPT.
Jeff
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
| |
 |