Re: [BK PATCHES] add ata scsi driver

[Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@pobox.com>]

Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Mon, 26 May 2003, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> 
>>Correct, but precisely by saying that, you're missing something.
> 
> 
> You're missing _my_ point.
> 
> 
>>The SCSI midlayer provides infrastructure I need -- which is not 
>>specific to SCSI at all.
> 
> 
> If it isn't specific to SCSI, then it sure as hell shouldn't BE THERE!
> 
> My point is that it's _wrong_ to make non-SCSI drivers use the SCSI layer, 
> because that shows that something is misdesigned.
> 
> And I bet there isn't all that much left that really helps.
> 
> You adding more "pseudo-SCSI" crap just _makes_things_worse. It does not 
> advance anything, it regresses. 


As you see from Alan's message and others, it isn't pseudo-SCSI.

Besides what he mentioned, there is Serial Attached SCSI (SAS), where a 
host controller can simultaneously support SAS disks and SATA disks.  So 
it's either an IDE driver that does SCSI, or a SCSI driver that does 
IDE, or a driver that's in both IDE and SCSI subsystems, or... ?  Having 
fun yet?  :)


> On 27 May 2003, Alan Cox wrote:
>>> I actually think thats a positive thing. It means 2.5 drivers/scsi is
>>> now very close to being the "native queueing driver" with some
>>> additional default plugins for doing scsi scanning, scsi error recovery 
>>> and a few other scsi bits.
> 
> Hey, that may well be the way to go, in which case the core stuff should
> be renamed and moved off somewhere else. Leaving drivers/scsi with just 
> the actual low-level SCSI drivers. 

For all these reasons, I continue to maintain that starting out as a 
SCSI driver, and then evolving, is the best route.  The non-SCSI parts 
leave drivers/scsi, as they should.  The SCSI parts stay.  The SCSI 
mid-layer gets smaller.  All the while, the driver continues to work. 
Everybody wins.

Starting out as a native block driver and _then_ adding SCSI support and 
native queueing and jazz does not sound even remotely like a good path 
to follow.

	Jeff