On Wednesday, September 28, 2005 10:59 AM, Luben Tuikov wrote:
> On 09/28/05 11:15, Moore, Eric Dean wrote:
> > Luben: I guess you didn't get what I meant.
> >
> > I was referring that there are other
> > *vendors* (not LSI, e.g MegaRAID) that are
> > working on sas solutions with sas firmware
> > implementation. One that comes to mind is
> > Intel SunRise Lake, which is non a MPT based
> > solution, that would work with Christophs
> > Sas Layer. There maybe others, such as emulex.
> > Perhaps James S. could comment on that.
>
> This means that they have an IOP on the same
> silicone or on the same packaging.
>
> This means, again that they'd done all transport
> specific tasks in the FW (by the IOP).
>
Can you stop this tirade, e.g. conspiracy theory,
in regards to LSI/MPT and the transport layer?
That is not the case. There will be other sas
solutions that implement discovery, and
sas/sata translation in firmware, higher level
event handling.
> Again, such solutions do _not_ need the
> SAS Transport Layer.
>
> They don't even need the attributes, but
> as a "nice to have" feature, you can use
> transport attributes.
Have you forgotten about CSMI/SDI? It was
nearly a year ago I got blasted when I posted
a sas driver with all those IOCTLs. CSMI/SDI
is more than a "nice to have" feature.
Its taken quite a bit of time(and greif)
to re-design the driver so it will work with
the transport layers in the way people on this
forum wanted it. Trust me, its been painful.
>
> You, as technical person, should recognize
> the different needs and thus the different
> solutions between LSI's implementation and
> Adaptec's.
>
> I'm surprised you never chimed in in defense
> of the _different_ technology.
>
> See, I've mentioned many times that the two
> radically different technologies can coexist.
> But I've not heard any technical word
> from the other guys: you.
>
I just don't have time to engage you.
I've got work to do, customer requests, issues,
etc.
Eric Moore
On 09/28/05 18:17, Moore, Eric Dean wrote:
> Can you stop this tirade, e.g. conspiracy theory,
> in regards to LSI/MPT and the transport layer?
What conspiracy theory?
Oh you mean that one _technology_ is in the kernel
and another distinct, radically _different_ is NOT?
Oh you mean that conspiracy theory?
> That is not the case. There will be other sas
I don't see our driver in the kernel, do you?
> solutions that implement discovery, and
> sas/sata translation in firmware, higher level
> event handling.
Yes, and they would all be MPT-like technology.
I don't have a problem with that.
What I have a problem with is that you folks
just sit and watch this, while you could explain
to James et al, that indeed the technologies
are different and there is no reason NOT to include
one but leave the other out.
>>See, I've mentioned many times that the two
>>radically different technologies can coexist.
>>But I've not heard any technical word
>>from the other guys: you.
>
> I just don't have time to engage you.
> I've got work to do, customer requests, issues,
> etc.
:-) That a nice way to get out of the situation.
I was hoping you'd say something like, "Yeah, the
technologies are different -- I don't see why one
should be in and another not."
Luben