Matthew Wilcox wrote:
On Mon, Sep 12, 2005 at 03:07:20PM -0400, Luben Tuikov wrote:
No, my point is that SCSI Core "development" isn't following any
spec or document or any formally accepted spec.
That's right. And it's actually a good thing.
Are you two discussing specs for scsi subsystem development process
here, or are you discussing specs for scsi subsystem architecture?
In case of the latter: These are indispensable. The scope of the scsi
subsystem is big enough to benefit from following the T10 specs,
including their concepts, their layers. I am saying this as somebody who
is trying to bring one small part of the subsystem forward, who will
never be able to grasp what is going on throughout the whole subsystem
nor to learn all about all SCSI layers. Thereby, every bigger or smaller
layering violation, every common SCSI concept that I have trouble to
match with Linux' scsi concepts will be a bigger or smaller setback for
undertakings like mine. (Well, I'm stating the obvious, or so I hope.)
--
Stefan Richter
-=====-=-=-= =--= -==-=
http://arcgraph.de/sr/
-
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]
| |
 |