From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andy Warner Subject: Re: [t13] RE: comment on T10 ATA-passthru Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 16:16:27 -0500 Sender: linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org Message-ID: <20041029161627.C29944@florence.linkmargin.com> References: <20041029142539.A29944@florence.linkmargin.com> <20041029194311.GA27218@havoc.gtf.org> <20041029153953.B29944@florence.linkmargin.com> <20041029205033.GA32007@havoc.gtf.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from ms-smtp-02.rdc-kc.rr.com ([24.94.166.122]:22660 "EHLO ms-smtp-02.rdc-kc.rr.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S263595AbUJ2VSU (ORCPT ); Fri, 29 Oct 2004 17:18:20 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20041029205033.GA32007@havoc.gtf.org>; from jgarzik@pobox.com on Fri, Oct 29, 2004 at 04:50:33PM -0400 List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org To: Jeff Garzik Cc: linville@redhat.com, linux-ide@vger.kernel.org Jeff Garzik wrote: > It is absolutely required that we snoop commands. > [...] OK - like I said, it really doesn't make any difference to me, I'm happy to implement a black/snoop-list. Does anyone else have constraints/suggestions/comments to offer ? Since I'll effectively be implementing a feature I don't care much about, I'll take all the (constructive) input available. -- andyw@pobox.com Andy Warner Voice: (612) 801-8549 Fax: (208) 575-5634