Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 27 Mar 2001 14:02:02 -0800 (PST) | From | Andre Hedrick <> | Subject | Re: Larger dev_t |
| |
On Tue, 27 Mar 2001, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > > On Tue, 27 Mar 2001, Alan Cox wrote: > > > > > layer made it impossible for a driver writer to be nice to the user, so > > > instead they got their own major numbers. > > > > Not deficiencies in the SCSI layer, there is no way the scsi layer can > > handle high end raid controllers. In fact one of the reasons we can beat > > NT with some of these controllers is because NT does exactly what you > > suggest with scsi miniport driver hacks and it _sucks_. Its an ugly hack. > > We could do this fairly _trivially_ today. > > With absolutely no performance degradation. > > With a simple "queue" mapping for the SCSI majors. Just look up which > queue to use for requests to which major, and you're done. The actual > IO may by-pass the SCSI layer altogether. > > So I'm absolutely not advocating using the SCSI layer for the > high-end-disks. Rather the reverse. I'm advocating the SCSI layer not > hogging a major number, but letting low-level drivers get at _their_ > requests directly.
Am I hearing you state you want dynamic device points and dynamic majors? Thus would be nice because the ridge structure now prevents a lot if things from developing.
Andre Hedrick Linux ATA Development ASL Kernel Development ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- ASL, Inc. Toll free: 1-877-ASL-3535 1757 Houret Court Fax: 1-408-941-2071 Milpitas, CA 95035 Web: www.aslab.com
- 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/
| |