Re: [PATCH 1/2] scsi: Add scsi_device max_cmd_len

[Brian King <brking@us.ibm.com>]

James Bottomley wrote:
> On Tue, 2006-03-28 at 16:38 -0600, Brian King wrote:
>> My direction at this point has been to move away from
>> the virtual scsi host device for SATA devices attached
>> to SAS HBAs. This seemed to me to be the clearest implementation.
>> Then you have 1 SAS HBA = 1 struct scsi_host, no matter
>> how many SATA devices are attached underneath it either
>> via direct attach or via an expander.
> 
> That's what a transport class implementation would allow you to do.  As
> long as the representation of the host controller device (be it PCI,
> SCSI IDE or whatever) has an embedded generic device, the class can
> attach and carry attributes.

I'm still struggling a little with where you want to head here. Are you
proposing a scsi_transport_sata in addition to the existing scsi transports,
or are you proposing adding to the existing scsi_transport_sas code?
I assume it is the latter, since a single SAS HBA will be supporting
both SAS and SATA devices at the same time and currently scsi core only
handles a single transport per scsi_host.


Thanks,

Brian

-- 
Brian King
eServer Storage I/O
IBM Linux Technology Center