From owner-freebsd-scsi  Sun Jul 23 12:34: 7 2000
Delivered-To: freebsd-scsi@freebsd.org
Received: from freebsd.dk (freebsd.dk [212.242.42.178])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id BD9D437B56D; Sun, 23 Jul 2000 12:34:03 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from sos@freebsd.dk)
Received: (from sos@localhost)
	by freebsd.dk (8.9.3/8.9.1) id VAA14095;
	Sun, 23 Jul 2000 21:34:00 +0200 (CEST)
	(envelope-from sos)
From: Soren Schmidt <sos@freebsd.dk>
Message-Id: <200007231934.VAA14095@freebsd.dk>
Subject: Re: CAM layer
In-Reply-To: <20000723212621.P49169@daemon.ninth-circle.org> from Jeroen Ruigrok/Asmodai at "Jul 23, 2000 09:26:21 pm"
To: asmodai@wxs.nl (Jeroen Ruigrok/Asmodai)
Date: Sun, 23 Jul 2000 21:34:00 +0200 (CEST)
Cc: scsi@freebsd.org, sos@freebsd.org
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL54 (25)]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Sender: owner-freebsd-scsi@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org

It seems Jeroen Ruigrok/Asmodai wrote:
> Is there anybody working on getting the CAM layer a bit less
> SCSI-specific in order to easily fold ATA under it so that we have a
> common access method, which CAM should be?

I've played a bit with having the ATAPI part use CAM, but the results
was not encouraging, having ATA devices use CAM is a different animal
and would probably require significant changes to CAM.
Another thing is the binary bloat CAM would add to an ATA/ATAPI
only system, and that is probably the most significant issue in
the projects I work on currently...

So, thats some of the reasons this falls further and further down
on my TODO list...


-Søren


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-scsi" in the body of the message