(Dropped most recepients of the original "ata over ethernet question" discussion, including lkml, from CC) Hi On Thu, 12 May 2005, James Bottomley wrote: > However, there is room for improvement in nbd, notably the handling of > packet commands, which looks to be eminently doable in the current > infrastructure (this would basically make nbd a replicator for the linux > block system, and would probably necessitate some client side changes to > achieve). If you have any thoughts in this direction, you could drop an > email to the maintainer. Ok, I came to a stage, when I start a server and a client, and then on the client side I can do open / close cycles, which would be respectively passed to the server, thus not keeping the server file(s) busy all the time. This allows, e.g., to export a CD-ROM, mount / umount it, eject it (not yet over nbd), insert a new one, mount, etc. Also, open errors are passed back, so, you get a nice "no medium" error on the client side without a CD. IIUC, the suggestion from James to implement ATAPI translates in user-space terms to implementing respective ioctl's, because this is what nbd gets, and this is what nbd-server has to reproduce. So, the work is not finished, at least some ioctl's are needed. I had to modify the kernel driver, and both the server and the client apps. No backward compatibility, sorry:-( What I'd like to do now is to ask - is there an interest in such changes to be integrated in the kernel / nbd-package. If there is one - what are your wishes? If we get that far, what should I post here - only the kernel patch, and user-space separately to sf (I think?), or both? (see also my another post today to linux-scsi) Thanks Guennadi --- Guennadi Liakhovetski - : 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
