From owner-freebsd-scsi Thu Jun 18 21:01:31 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id VAA15288 for freebsd-scsi-outgoing; Thu, 18 Jun 1998 21:01:31 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-scsi@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from roma.coe.ufrj.br (jonny@roma.coe.ufrj.br [146.164.53.65]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id VAA15278 for ; Thu, 18 Jun 1998 21:01:25 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jonny@jonny.eng.br) Received: (from jonny@localhost) by roma.coe.ufrj.br (8.8.8/8.8.8) id BAA25325; Fri, 19 Jun 1998 01:00:55 -0300 (EST) (envelope-from jonny) From: Joao Carlos Mendes Luis Message-Id: <199806190400.BAA25325@roma.coe.ufrj.br> Subject: Re: Rolling CAM in, what is still needed? In-Reply-To: <199806190354.VAA10250@panzer.plutotech.com> from "Kenneth D. Merry" at "Jun 18, 98 09:54:01 pm" To: ken@plutotech.com (Kenneth D. Merry) Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 01:00:54 -0300 (EST) Cc: jonny@jonny.eng.br, ken@plutotech.com, ckempf@enigami.com, freebsd-scsi@FreeBSD.ORG X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL40 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-scsi@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org #define quoting(Kenneth D. Merry) // Joao Carlos Mendes Luis wrote... // > #define quoting(Kenneth D. Merry) // > // One other area that could use some work/help is userland // > // application porting. So far, we have: // > // > Isn't it possible to do a compatibility layer in CAM ? Changes in // > API are always a PITA. // // Yeah, in fact I even had a SCIOCCOMMAND implementation for the // passthrough driver early on. I would much rather, however, move // applications over to the new API. It isn't that hard to use. // // I know that changes in API can be a PITA, I had to port a very // large application from the old scsireq/SCIOCCOMMAND system to the new // passthrough driver. We can't keep old API's around forever for no // particular reason, so I'd rather go ahead and port things. Sorry for my ignorance, but is this interface FreeBSD only ? If it's somewhat generic (say, *BSD), I'd prefer to have both, and have immediate portability for "future" applications. Is there a big advantage on the new scheme ? At least, while CAM is in transition mode, being available only as patches, the compatibilty API would make easy to choose cam or not-cam during boot time (for those interfaces available in both modes, of course). I hope that's what you said above. As always, JMHO, and not being an involved programmer, my vote is not much here. :) Jonny -- Joao Carlos Mendes Luis M.Sc. Student jonny@jonny.eng.br Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-scsi" in the body of the message