On Fri, 2005-08-19 at 14:07 -0400, Luben Tuikov wrote: > So you're doing architectural decisions based on guesses on how > Adaptec's (design) driver is? You can't have it both ways. We have to take a fully theoretical approach (which does involve guesswork) because only the vendors have the actual silicon and devices to set up a SAS topology. However, it has become equally clear that we cannot rely on the vendors to come up with a SAS class (and this in not for want of effort on our part). The current SAS class will only get validated when it actually meets real SAS topologies, which is acceptable in my view just to get this project actually moving; code can always be updated later ... > There is a lot more areas where SCSI core needs improvement -- > *that* would be commendable work. Patches are always welcome as long as they solve real problems or make real improvements. Open source is "itch driven" to a large extent (as in if something bites you, you have the impetus to scratch the sore place and fix it) ... remember society doesn't encourage the scratching of other peoples itches (in public at least) ... James - : 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
