--- Stefan Richter <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Will cmd_per_lun, sg_tablesize, max_sectors, dma_boundary,
> use_clustering ever have to be adjusted specifically for a SAS hardware?
No hardware SAS chip I know of needs any of those legacy limitations.
Neither BCM8603 nor Fusion MPT.
Those limitations are purely Parallel SCSI.
I just included it, to show proof of concept -- when the architecure and
layering is correct, how easy it is to do it. But you're right, it is
not needed.
> Obviuosly none of this is required _at the moment_. IOW neither the
> introduction of a sas_ha_hw_profile nor a pass-through of
> scsi_host_template down to SAS interconnect drivers is required right
> now. So why do one or the other now? Isn't it a sensible rule to not
> solve problems now which do not exist yet?
This is exactly the rule I followed when developing the SAS Transport
Layer for Linux. Furthermore, _that_ rule, to never overengineer, I learned
from Linux. Sadly the politics are too deep and that rule applies only
to what is convenient, at least in Linux SCSI.
Luben
--
http://linux.adaptec.com/sas/
http://www.adaptec.com/sas/
-
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]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
