| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2009 08:35:42 +0200 From: Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com> To: Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org> Cc: linux-ide@...r.kernel.org, linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Tejun Heo <htejun@...il.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH] libata: rewrite SCSI host scheme to be one per ATA host On Wed, Apr 22 2009, Jeff Garzik wrote: > Jeff Garzik wrote: >> Currently, libata creates a Scsi_Host per port. This was originally >> done to leverage SCSI's infrastructure to arbitrate among master/slave >> devices, but is not needed for most modern SATA controllers. And I >> _think_ it is not needed for master/slave if done properly, either. > > BTW note the above, with regards to the libata SCSI->block conversion. > libata currently relies on SCSI for some amount of generic device > arbitration, in several situations (see ->qc_defer, > SCSI_MLQUEUE_.*_BUSY). libata expects SCSI to be intelligent and not > starve devices, etc. Defer looks like internal policy, I don't see that functioning any different in the block layer. SCSI_MLQUEUE_*_BUSY in SCSI is primarily using the block layer functionality of BLKPREP_DEFER to begin with, so I think we're pretty close to providing all that already. -- Jens Axboe -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists