From owner-freebsd-hackers Sun Aug 16 01:19:32 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id BAA12664 for freebsd-hackers-outgoing; Sun, 16 Aug 1998 01:19:32 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from sos.freebsd.dk (sos.freebsd.dk [212.242.40.180]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id BAA12652; Sun, 16 Aug 1998 01:19:24 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from sos@sos.freebsd.dk) Received: (from sos@localhost) by sos.freebsd.dk (8.9.1/8.8.8) id KAA01592; Sun, 16 Aug 1998 10:17:44 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from sos) Message-Id: <199808160817.KAA01592@sos.freebsd.dk> Subject: Re: TESTERS WANTED for new ATAPI CD/CDR/CDRW driver. In-Reply-To: <199808160609.AAA02488@narnia.plutotech.com> from "Justin T. Gibbs" at "Aug 16, 98 00:09:29 am" To: gibbs@narnia.plutotech.com (Justin T. Gibbs) Date: Sun, 16 Aug 1998 10:17:44 +0200 (CEST) Cc: sos@FreeBSD.ORG, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG From: Søren Schmidt Reply-to: sos@FreeBSD.ORG X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL38 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG In reply to Justin T. Gibbs who wrote: > In article <199808151902.VAA08482@sos.freebsd.dk> you wrote: > > > >> For what it's worth, I don't see much value in treating ATA disks as > >> though they were SCSI disks; the overhead in translation is probably > >> too high. On the other hand, I'm less sure about things that use the > >> ATAPI packet protocol. > > > > The ATA driver with lowlevel ATAPI support _must_ be implemented in > > all cases, the difference is if the ATAPI device are registered under > > CAM (scsi) or if there are nataive ATAPI drivers instead. > > I don't understand why everyone has this misconception. Then you also dont understand what I'm writing :) What I said is that the lowlevel support (ie that code thats speaks directly to the controller/drive) has to be implemented no matter what layer I put on top. Now I allready have a layer that talks ATAPI (ie the old ATAPI system), and I still use that for now in the code put up for testing (and that has NONE of the new LL code in it, its just burner support). If one wants CAM (and maybe we all will when it gets there), its a matter of exchanging the interface to the top layer which is pretty easy when you have all the LL stuff in place. So when do we get CAM, when do we get documentation for it ?? When thats in place I'll look at using it... -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Søren Schmidt (sos@FreeBSD.org) FreeBSD Core Team Even more code to hack -- will it ever end? .. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message