Matthew Wilcox wrote: > On Fri, Oct 21, 2005 at 02:12:49PM -0400, Luben Tuikov wrote: > >>>That beeing said I tried this approach. It looks pretty cool when you >>>think about it, but the block layer is quite a bit too heavyweight for >>>queueing up a few SMP requests, and we need to carry too much useless >>>code around for it. >> >>That's the last reason not to implement SMP as a block device. >>But this is good that you tried it and it "flopped". This way >>people will stop repeating "SMP... block device". > > > Block layer != Block device. > > Nobody wants to implement SMP as a block device. > > The question is whether the SMP interface should be implemented as part > of the block layer. However, the block layer is used in the context of a block device (and in some cases a char device). If SAS domain discovery is done from the user space, and the root file system is the far side of a SAS expander, there are no suitable devices, just the SAS initiator (HBA) which currently we cannot address via the block layer. Doug Gilbert - : 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
