Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2005 16:39:34 -0200
From: Marcelo Tosatti <marcelo.tosatti@cyclades.com>
To: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <bzolnier@gmail.com>
Cc: Bill Davidsen <davidsen@tmr.com>, Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@pobox.com>,
       Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org>,
       Martins Krikis <mkrikis@yahoo.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
       alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk
Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE] "iswraid" (ICHxR ataraid sub-driver) for 2.4.29
Message-ID: <20050210183934.GF20153@logos.cnet>
References: <420631BF.7060407@pobox.com> <420582C6.7060407@pobox.com> <58cb370e05020607197db9ecf4@mail.gmail.com> <420BB77B.3080508@tmr.com> <58cb370e05021012051518e912@mail.gmail.com> <58cb370e0502101404e4ddefa@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <58cb370e0502101404e4ddefa@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.5.1i
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 3964
Lines: 87

On Thu, Feb 10, 2005 at 11:04:09PM +0100, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
> On Thu, 10 Feb 2005 21:05:13 +0100, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
> <bzolnier@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Thu, 10 Feb 2005 14:35:23 -0500, Bill Davidsen <davidsen@tmr.com> wrote:
> > > Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
> > > > On Sun, 06 Feb 2005 10:03:27 -0500, Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@pobox.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >>Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >>>>I consider it not a new feature, but a missing feature, since otherwise
> > > >>>>user data cannot be accessed in the RAID setups.
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>>the same is true for all new hardware drivers and hardware support
> > > >>>patches. And for new DRM (since new X may need it) and new .. and
> > > >>>new ... where is the line?
> > > >>>
> > > >>>for me a deep maintenance mode is about keeping existing stuff working;
> > > >>>all new hw support and derivative hardware support (such as this) can be
> > > >>>pointed at the new stable series... which has been out for quite some
> > > >>>time now..
> > > >>
> > > >>Red herring.
> > > >>
> > > >>2.4.x has ICH5/6 support -- but is missing the RAID support component.
> > > >>
> > > >>We are talking about hardware that is ALREADY supported by 2.4.x kernel,
> > > >>not new hardware.
> > > >>
> > > >>We are also talking about inability to access data on hardware supported
> > > >>by 2.4.x, not something that can easily be ignored or papered over with
> > > >>a compatibility mode.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > the same arguments can be used for crypto support etc.,
> > > > answer is - use 2.6.x or add extra patches to get 2.4.x working
> > >
> > > It's fix in a sense. The hardware is supported now, just not very well.
> > > If an IDE chipset was capable of UDA4 and the driver only allowed UDA2
> > > it would be a fix, in this case thehardware is supported partially, the
> > > RAID conponent isn't working, and this is the fix.
> > 
> > The so called "RAID component" is 100% *software* solution.
> > 
> > BTW What is UDA?
> 
> [ This mail is just to explain why I don't like iswraid,
>   I don't care if it gets merged that much... ]
> 
> another BTW: this driver adds another incompatibility between
> 2.4.x and 2.6.x.  

What do you mean "adds another incompatibility" ? 

That users will have to switch to dmraid when upgrading to v2.6.x ? 

> Also most 2.4.x users will want (or have to) migrate
> to 2.6.x one day and they will have to switch to using device mapper
> and dmraid anyway.  From my POV merging/supporting iswraid
> in any way is a lost of time for EVERYBODY in the long-term.
> Martins, I appreciate all hard work that went into iswraid driver but
> please face the simple fact, this driver was already obsoleted in
> the moment it was created (from Linux development process POV).
> 
> I previously (October?) asked about merging device-mapper
> instead as it provides easier way to migrate to 2.6.x (not only for
> Intel "RAID component" users but for ALL "RAID components" users)
> as they would be able to use the same method for accessing their
> data in both kernels.  I was said that it is too late for such changes
> (I consider device-mapper a new driver, changes to existing code
> are REALLY minimal AFAIR) and that 2.4.x should stick to ataraid while
> 2.6.x to device-mapper which was just silly argument IMHO (why we
> don't stick to IDE drivers for SATA in 2.4.x?).

SATA is not the same case as sw-RAID in my POV Bart, it allows many 
users to be _able_ use SATA controllers/drives. 

> I finally gave up because I didn't want to waste more my time on this and 
> didn't want to go into
> politics etc... but damn iswraid wasn't merged so I feel stupid now. :-)

Good to hear your opinion.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/