On Tue, May 24 2005, Hannes Reinecke wrote: > Jeff Garzik wrote: > > Jens Axboe wrote: > >> On Tue, May 24 2005, Jeff Garzik wrote: > >>> I can describe how this will look when libata is divorced from SCSI, > >>> if you would like, too... > >> > >> I was beginning to dispair you had given up that plan... > > > > hehe, nope. I promised Linus, and I plan to keep my promise :) > > > > I know how to do it. Internally things have been kept as separate as > > possible from the SCSI layer. > > > > Bart even hinted at possibly using libata-without-SCSI for future > > /dev/hdX support. It's certainly doable. > > > AAArgh! No, not again! > > We've finally succeeded in convincing everyone that having '/dev/sdX' > instead of '/dev/hdX' was a neccessary step forward. > I think we're getting shot if we now tell them to reverse this _again_. > Can we at least have it optional? Moving to /dev/sdX was never a step forward, it's was merely a necessary side ways step because libata used the scsi layer. A step forward would be device agnostic /dev/disk mappings instead. > Or are you talking about linux-3.X ? Hopefully before that :-) -- Jens Axboe - : send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
