From: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@steeleye.com>
To: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@pobox.com>
Cc: Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: 2.7 block ramblings (was Re: DMA for ide-scsi?)
Date: 13 Sep 2003 15:16:09 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1063484193.1781.48.camel@mulgrave> (raw)
Oh, and I'm pondering the best way to deliver out-of-bang ATA taskfiles
and SCSI cdbs to a device. (for the uninitiated, this is lower level
than block devices / cdrom devices / etc.)
... AF_BLOCK is not out of the question ;-)
Well, I think the main issue to doing this is one of layering. What
SAM-3 did for SCSI was essentially give us a 3 layer stack which the
kernel represents as the upper, the mid and the lower layers (Note,
these layers are subdividable too).
For SCSI commands, queuecommand() is a natural handoff point from the
mid to lower layer representing a pure scsi command with no transport
dependent details.
For ATA, a task file does contain transport dependent knowledge, thus it
should enter the stack at a slightly lower level (and a level which the
current SCSI model doesn't even represent).
Thus, the two ways of approaching this would seem to be either to derive
somehow a way of removing the transport dependence from the taskfile (a
sort of Task CDB for ATA), or redo the driver model stack to subdivide
the current low level drivers correctly. I think the latter will
probably be more productive, particularly if the subdivision is made
optional (and thus wouldn't affect most of the drivers currently in the
tree). Even in SCSI, there are certain register based SCSI Parallel
cards that would benefit from being driven at the same level as a task
file.
James
next reply other threads:[~2003-09-13 20:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-09-13 20:16 James Bottomley [this message]
2003-09-13 21:27 ` 2.7 block ramblings (was Re: DMA for ide-scsi?) Jeff Garzik
2003-09-14 11:15 ` Justin Cormack
2003-09-14 15:02 ` Alan Cox
2003-09-14 16:55 ` Kevin P. Fleming
2003-09-14 17:01 ` Andries Brouwer
2003-09-14 17:24 ` Jeff Garzik
2003-09-14 18:55 ` Alan Cox
2003-09-16 2:38 ` Thomas Molina
2003-09-16 13:56 ` Alan Cox
2003-09-14 17:20 ` Jeff Garzik
2003-09-14 16:12 ` Andries Brouwer
2003-09-14 17:30 ` Jeff Garzik
2003-09-13 2:11 ` Matt Domsch
2003-09-14 22:26 ` Alan Cox
2003-09-13 6:05 ` Matt Domsch
2003-09-15 22:16 ` Matt Domsch
2003-09-15 3:23 ` Andre Hedrick
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2003-09-13 11:01 DMA for ide-scsi? Mikael Pettersson
2003-09-13 18:04 ` Alan Cox
2003-09-13 18:49 ` 2.7 block ramblings (was Re: DMA for ide-scsi?) Jeff Garzik
2003-09-13 19:01 ` Jeff Garzik
2003-09-13 19:06 ` Jeff Garzik
2003-09-15 7:34 ` Jens Axboe
2003-09-16 19:49 ` Jeff Garzik
2003-09-16 19:55 ` Jens Axboe
2003-09-20 18:28 ` Jeff Garzik
2003-09-20 22:16 ` Alan Cox
2003-09-20 22:22 ` Jeff Garzik
2003-09-20 22:46 ` Alan Cox
2003-09-21 9:23 ` Jens Axboe
2003-09-13 19:24 ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
2003-09-13 19:57 ` Jeff Garzik
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1063484193.1781.48.camel@mulgrave \
--to=james.bottomley@steeleye.com \
--cc=jgarzik@pobox.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox