Re: [RFC PATCH 35/35] Add Xen virtual block device driver.

[Mike Christie <michaelc@cs.wisc.edu>]

Dave C Boutcher wrote:
> Jeff Garzik wrote:
>> Arjan van de Ven wrote:
>>> On Fri, 2006-03-24 at 08:37 -0500, Jeff Garzik wrote:
>>>> Jeff Garzik wrote:
>>>>> In fact, SCSI should make a few things easier, because the notion of 
>>>>> host+bus topology is already present, and notion of messaging is already 
>>>>> present, so you don't have to recreate that in a Xen block device 
>>>>> infrastructure.
>>>> Another benefit of SCSI:  when an IBM hypervisor in the Linux kernel 
>>>> switched to SCSI, that allowed them to replace several drivers (virt 
>>>> disk, virt cdrom, virt floppy?) with a single virt-SCSI driver.
>>> but there's a generic one for that: iSCSI
>>> so in theory you only need to provide a network driver then ;)
>> Talk about lots of overhead :)
>>
>> OTOH, I bet that T10 is acting at high speed, right this second, to form 
>> a committee, and multiple sub-committees, to standardize SCSI 
>> transported over XenBus.  SXP anyone?  :)
> 
> Actually SRP (which T10 has now stopped working on) fits the bill very
> nicely.
> 

Does the IBM vscsi code/SPEC follow the SRP SPEC or is it slightly 
modified? We also have a SRP initiator in kernel now too. It is just not 
in the drivers/scsi dir.