Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2002 10:26:59 +0200 From: "Nick Hibma" <n_hibma@van-laarhoven.org> To: <thomas@cuivre.fr.eu.org> Cc: <freebsd-scsi@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Port of NetBSD usscanner Message-ID: <002601c1e9d7$78d12f20$7800420a@vanlaarhoven.org> References: <20020420030300.B5762@melusine.cuivre.fr.eu.org> <001a01c1e9cd$9cac7580$7800420a@vanlaarhoven.org> <20020422100912.A61658@melusine.cuivre.fr.eu.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > - What is the difference between this driver and normal SCSI devices
that
> > forces you to write a separate driver? Can't you just
> > slightly modify the umass driver? (which should in that case be renamed
to
> > ucam or something). It should require no more than a new command layer,
just
> > like umass_{bbb,cbi}_{transfer,state,...}.
>
> I was under the impression that the two drivers (umass and usscanner)
> are using different means of mapping SCSI command and data transfers
> onto USB transfers, but if this can integrated in umass it would
> certainly be worthwhile. I just took the least resistance path of
> porting the stuff as it exists in NetBSD (with a number of ideas
> liberally stolen from your port of umass).
They do use a different command transport, but the umass driver has support
for that. At the moment it supports two, BBB and CBI.
Nick
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-scsi" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?002601c1e9d7$78d12f20$7800420a>