On Fri, 29 Dec 2006, Jeremy Chadwick wrote:
On Fri, Dec 29, 2006 at 12:15:37AM -0700, Scott Long wrote:
Did you know that ATAPI is actually just the SCSI command set that is
merely encapsulated into the IDE wire protocol?
This is something Linux has done (you can still use the direct ATA
and IDE subsystems if you want, but in most major distros I've seen
as of late, they use a SCSI-to-ATA conversion layer).
Thus: why haven't we moved the front-end to the ATA subsystem into
atapicam(4) then? Is it just the amount of work involved, or are
there technical reasons?
atapicam works by using CAM (SCSI) as the front end and ATA as the back
end. It's not correct to say that the rest of ATA should be moved into
atapicam. Instead what you want is to teach CAM how to do more back-ends
than just parallel SCSI. There are no technical reasons not to experiment
with this. It is a bit of work, though.
Scott
_______________________________________________
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
