From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff Garzik Subject: Re: "do ata" scsi command? Date: Fri, 16 May 2003 12:35:43 -0400 Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org Message-ID: <3EC5135F.50803@pobox.com> References: <20030515230223.GA516@gtf.org> <20030516060324.GT812@suse.de> 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]:38602 "EHLO www.linux.org.uk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S264480AbTEPQXM (ORCPT ); Fri, 16 May 2003 12:23:12 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20030516060324.GT812@suse.de> List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org Cc: Jens Axboe Jens Axboe wrote: > On Thu, May 15 2003, Jeff Garzik wrote: > >>In terms of a userspace interface for my ata-over-scsi gadget, I would >>prefer to use /dev/sg instead of inventing a totally new interface. >>That, in turn, implies a need for a "do ata taskfile" scsi command, >>which is sorta like ATAPI in reverse: we are wrapping a raw ata >>taskfile inside a scsi cdb. Based on private responses as well as Jens' response, I think my initial post must have been terribly unclear. Let me restate: I have chosen the standard, existing scsi-generic nterface as the one by which raw taskfiles will be sent to devices. The taskfile will be wrapped inside a SCSI cdb. To me this solution is the most flexibility for least cost. So, what opcode do I choose for "send taskfile"? Either (a) pick a vendor-specific one, or (b) someone else already chose an opcode. So my post was really these questions: a or b? if b, what opcode? (see, existing interfaces satisfy my needs :)) Jeff