From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [PATCH 2.6.13 14/14] sas-class: SCSI Host glue Date: Sun, 11 Sep 2005 10:40:07 +0100 Message-ID: <20050911094007.GB5429@infradead.org> References: <20050910041218.29183.qmail@web51612.mail.yahoo.com> <1126383605.30449.12.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from pentafluge.infradead.org ([213.146.154.40]:18096 "EHLO pentafluge.infradead.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S964842AbVIKJkN (ORCPT ); Sun, 11 Sep 2005 05:40:13 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1126383605.30449.12.camel@localhost.localdomain> Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: Alan Cox Cc: Rik van Riel , Luben Tuikov , James Bottomley , Luben Tuikov , Linux Kernel Mailing List , SCSI Mailing List On Sat, Sep 10, 2005 at 09:20:05PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote: > On Sad, 2005-09-10 at 10:30 -0400, Rik van Riel wrote: > > That's very nice for you - but lets face it, a SAS layer > > that'll be unable to also deal with the El-Cheapo brand > > controllers isn't going to be very useful. > > If future cheap SAS controllers are like cheap anything else controllers > then it is better IMHO to deal with it once the problems are visible. We > *know* from experience that hardware limits will be weirder than the > anticipated. Yes, absolutely. This discussion is driving far off right now, no one is asking Adaptec to add support for competing products here, we're just asking to not declare the host_template in the common code, and supporting limited controllers is one of the reasons.