On Tue, Sep 13, 2005 at 05:02:36PM -0400, Luben Tuikov wrote: > On 09/13/05 16:36, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 13, 2005 at 04:23:42PM -0400, Luben Tuikov wrote: > > > >>A SCSI LUN is not "u64 lun", it has never been and it will > >>never be. > >> > >>A SCSI LUN is "u8 LUN[8]" -- it is this from the Application > >>Layer down to the _transport layer_ (if you cared to look at > >>_any_ LL transport). Not all HBA drivers implement a mapping to a SCSI transport, we have raid drivers and even an FC driver that has its own lun definition that does not fit any SAM or SCSI spec. I think the only HBA's today that can handle an 8 byte lun are lpfc and iscsi (plus new SAS ones). So, we can't have one "LUN" that fits all, and it makes no sense to call it a LUN when it is really a wtf. -- Patrick Mansfield - : 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
