On 10/03/05 18:56, Linus Torvalds wrote: > So when the SAS people say that the SCSI layer should conform to their > needs, next time they should remember that it _also_ needs to conform to > the needs of things like USB storage. Which has totally different goals, > implementation issues, and bugs. It does, Linus, it does. SAS/USB/SBP all implement pretty close to SAM architecture whereby the transport layer (SAS/USB/SBP) sits between SCSI Core (SAM to be) and the interconnect (USB bus, SAS link, Infiniband, IEEE1394, TCP/IP, FC, etc). The reason of all this hoopla is that James B, wants to decree that LSI/MPT is the norm and everything else (USB/SAS/SBP) is the exception, while in fact it is the other way around. This is because 10 years ago, all there was was Parallel SCSI, and all LLDD implemented Parallel SCSI and above them was SCSI Core. So in effect there was no need for Parallel SCSI Transport _layer_ between an SPI LLDD and SCSI Core. What you see in my SAS Code is what you see in USB Storage (sans EH) and what you see in SBP. It is the same architecture: layered. 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
