From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff Garzik Subject: Re: RFC: moving drivers to a new drivers/ata directory Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2004 13:20:48 -0400 Sender: linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org Message-ID: <417006F0.5040706@pobox.com> References: <416F5757.8000306@pobox.com> <416F8C39.6010804@torque.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk ([195.92.249.252]:43651 "EHLO www.linux.org.uk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S268206AbUJORVB (ORCPT ); Fri, 15 Oct 2004 13:21:01 -0400 In-Reply-To: <416F8C39.6010804@torque.net> List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org To: dougg@torque.net Cc: SCSI Mailing List , "linux-ide@vger.kernel.org" , Alan Cox Douglas Gilbert wrote: > Jeff Garzik wrote: > >> >> Eventually I would like to move libata, and a few non-libata driver >> like 3ware, to drivers/ata. It would appear in the makefile (and link >> order) _after_ drivers/ide and drivers/scsi. >> >> Comments/objections? > > > A comment: if SAS HBAs ever get installed on motherboards then > it won't be obvious to the average user which susbsystem they > should configure (i.e. ATA/SATA or SCSI/SAS). In both cases an > internal SATA disk could be connected via a SATA cable to a > plug on the motherboard. > > So if you do move the drivers to the ata directory it may be > useful to stress that it is the category of HBA that is > signficant rather than the device at the far end of the cable. That implies that scsi is an acceptable appelation for ATA controllers? Maybe we need a neutral one like 'drivers/storage'. Jeff