Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 10 Feb 2006 12:31:10 -0500 | From | Wakko Warner <> | Subject | Re: Let's get rid of ide-scsi |
| |
Greg KH wrote: > On Fri, Feb 10, 2006 at 07:11:07AM -0500, Wakko Warner wrote: > > Greg KH wrote: > > > What "seperate USB block layer"? > > > > Maybe not a "block layer", but there was this Under drivers/block devices in > > the config: > > Low Performance USB Block driver > > What is your objection to this driver? It fills a real need for people > who do not want the whole scsi stack in their kernels (embedded, memory > constraints, closed systems, etc.), and probably is not even considered > "Low Performance" anymore.
Ok, now this I did not know which is why I personally objected to it. I saw no reason to have it with usb-storage since both did something similar. Now that I know what it's purpose is, I don't see a problem with it as far as availability to the ones who are low memory, embedded, etc, but I won't need it myself. I normally use systtems with scsi controllers and need the full scsi layer.
If/When libata takes over ide in general, how many of these machine will then require the scsi layer? I would think all systems would except ones without internal disks (non-usb/firewire).
I do appreciate the info, thanks.
-- Lab tests show that use of micro$oft causes cancer in lab animals Got Gas??? - 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/
| |