Mark A. Carlson wrote: > The piece that seems to be missing from these "converged" cases is not > the NIC functionality, but the HBA equivalent functionality. A CNA is > both. Is that a separate case? Why?
Indeed if this is just a NIC driver for a bit of hardware that can be both a NIC and an HBA I don't see the case as being a CNA. What I don't even understand is will this CNA be driven by one or two drivers ? > Darren J Moffat wrote: >> Garrett D'Amore - sun microsystems wrote: >>> This is another case that maybe could be handled as a self-review, but >>> because there is no precedent for converged devices yet, I felt it best >>> to leave this a fast track. >> >> I think I'm going to be asking the same question Rich did in the other >> case. >> >> What does it really mean that this is a converged NIC driver. From >> what I can tell from both of these cases there is a physical bit of >> hardware that does two things. Yet the drivers for these cases only >> mention the GLDv3 networking part. So how are these different to >> other NIC drivers for things on the motherboard ? >> >> Is there going to be a single driver for the GLDv3 part and the >> "other" part ? What is the "other" part ? If it is separate drivers >> then I don't see what the issue really is. >> >> The only thing I can relate to is the vca(7D) driver for the SCA-4000 >> that you were involved in. >> > -- Darren J Moffat
