Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932170AbVI2Qdb (ORCPT ); Thu, 29 Sep 2005 12:33:31 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932239AbVI2Qda (ORCPT ); Thu, 29 Sep 2005 12:33:30 -0400 Received: from magic.adaptec.com ([216.52.22.17]:61354 "EHLO magic.adaptec.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932170AbVI2Qd3 (ORCPT ); Thu, 29 Sep 2005 12:33:29 -0400 Message-ID: <433C174D.4050302@adaptec.com> Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 12:33:17 -0400 From: Luben Tuikov User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.6 (X11/20050716) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Bernd Petrovitsch CC: Linux Kernel Mailing List , SCSI Mailing List , Andre Hedrick , Patrick Mansfield , Luben Tuikov , Jeff Garzik , Andrew Morton , Linus Torvalds Subject: Re: I request inclusion of SAS Transport Layer and AIC-94xx into the kernel References: <433B0374.4090100@adaptec.com> <20050928223542.GA12559@alpha.home.local> <433BFB1F.2020808@adaptec.com> <1128007032.11443.77.camel@tara.firmix.at> In-Reply-To: <1128007032.11443.77.camel@tara.firmix.at> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-OriginalArrivalTime: 29 Sep 2005 16:33:26.0431 (UTC) FILETIME=[844852F0:01C5C513] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2254 Lines: 62 On 09/29/05 11:17, Bernd Petrovitsch wrote: > > Then submit your driver as a (separate) block device in parallel to the > existing SCSI subsystem. People will use it for/with other parts if it SAS is ultimately SCSI. I'll just have to write my own SCSI core. _We_ together can do this in parallel to the old SCSI Core. This is the whole idea. > makes sense (and you - as the maintainer - accept their patches). And in You see, at my age and my situation, I no longer see this as "my balls - your balls". What matters to me is good design, quality code, customer satisfaction, bottom line. E.g. I'm quite a liberal person and I wouldn't block or stop new technologes from going into Linux on the basis and merit of my not understanidn that particular new technology. The bottom line is not "my balls - your balls" but the wide spread use of Linux and "storage OS of choice". Not "hobbyist OS of choice" and not "let me play Robin Hood". > a few years the "old" SCSI core fades out as legacy drives fade out (or > they will happily coexist forever). Yep, I've been saying this since 2002. On the linux-scsi ML. > The point is: If *you* want it that way, *you* must go that way (and do > not expect others to do it just that *you* get *your* driver merged). > You are the maintainer of the new stuff and (almost) everything will > work as you want. And this is the problem: *you* and "the community" see things in *this* way: "your balls - my balls", "yours/mine". While I see things like this: new technology, absolve, use, move on. As to your comment above, it's not about how *I* see things. It's about how things _actually_ *are*: http://www.t10.org/ftp/t10/drafts/sam4/sam4r03.pdf > It might not be the cleanest or most elegant solution in the world, but > if it works, who cares and why? Turn the table around: can _I_ pose this question to JB and Christoph? (since they are the ones who think this of SAM/SPC) > Where is now the real problem? > I can't see one. Me neither. Luben - 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/