>On Monday 30 August 2010 Arnd Bergmann wrote: >>On Monday 30 August 2010, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote: >> Have you investigated making virtio a scsi device? > >I doubt that there is much value in changing it now, and it's not something I'd be interested in working on. >For the HyperV drivers, it probably makes sense because half of it is trying to look >like SCSI anyway, while the other half is trying to look like ATA. For the ATA driver, >the obvious choice would be to make it a libata backend, though my impression >from a brief look at the driver was that it's better to copy some of the libata code >and integrate it into the hv SCSI driver. Arnd, Thanks for following up! I was cleaning up some other part of the drivers (not related to IDE/SCSI) And on my todo list is to clean up the IDE/SCSI drivers. I will go through the libata code and see If there is anything in there that I can use to make these drivers somewhat saner. I am not sure if I can combine them into one yet, Hyper-V treats both drivers differently. And there Are some rumored changes to Hyper-V that would make these changes maybe even a bit more difficult. I will use this mailing list to bounce ideas off of. I still need to clean up your other suggestion as well, the static declarations :) For a more general question, When/if we make it out of staging, where should these drivers live? drivers/hyper-v or drivers/scsi and drivers/ide. Is there a standard that is being followed? Hank. _______________________________________________ Virtualization mailing list Virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
