On 09/30/05 17:31, Kyle Moffett wrote: > Jeff Garzik et. al. seem to think that they are necessary, and I I've been contending this since before Jeff started work on libata. But none of the ideas: 64 bit LUN, HCIL removal, etc., were accepted with "submit a patch". > So you're saying fixing the current SCSI subsystem once *now* costs > more than applying all *future* SCSI fixes to _two_ SCSI subsystems, > handling bug reports for _two_ SCSI subsystems, etc. I'm saying that the current "old" one is already obsolete, when all you have is a SAS chip on your mainboard. All you need is a small, tiny, fast, slim SCSI Core. >>>s/Politics.*//g; I hate politics. Keep it off this list. >> >>Me too, but we are idealists. Politics is an integral part of life. > > > Politics are not an integral part of productive technical > discussions, though. If you discuss technical topics and provide > realistic technical descriptions, examples, reasons, code, etc, then > politics tends not to matter in the discussion, and we're all happier > people. Yes, please re-read this thread, and open and read all the references I've included to SAM, SPC, SAS and SAT of T10.org. Politics: "Nah, whatever you say, specs are *crap* and we'll do it our way. We are not interested in your way, even if it were better. Oh, and BTW, REQUEST SENSE clears ACA and LUN is a u64." See? Luben - : 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
