On Mon, 3 Oct 2005, Luben Tuikov wrote:
The SAS transport class supports commonality across all SAS
implementations. This includes both MPT and Adaptec 94xx.
SAS transport class + libsas supports software implementations of SAS,
including transport layer management. This includes Adaptec 94xx but
NOT MPT.
You almost get it right, other than the layering infrastructure.
The SAS Transport Layer is a layer in its own right. It is not
a "libsas".
MPT and open transport a very different, one hides the transport,
i.e. the transport layer is in firmware; the other exposes it
and needs a transport layer. See the pictures here:
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-kernel&m=112810649712793&w=2
in this case wouldn't it be trivial to write a 'null transport' driver
that just passed things down to the card to let the firmware deal with it?
(reformatting the data if needed)
having a null driver for a layer for some hardware, and a much more
complex driver for the same layer for other hardware is fairly common in
Linux. I believe ti was Linus that said in an interview that Linux is now
largely designed for an ideal abstracted CPU, with code put in on the
architectures that don't have a feature to simulate that feature in
software.
David Lang
--
There are two ways of constructing a software design. One way is to make it so simple that there are obviously no deficiencies. And the other way is to make it so complicated that there are no obvious deficiencies.
-- C.A.R. Hoare
-
: 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
