Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 12 Feb 2008 11:45:29 -0800 (PST) | From | Luben Tuikov <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] enclosure: add support for enclosure services |
| |
--- On Tue, 2/12/08, Kristen Carlson Accardi <kristen.c.accardi@intel.com> wrote: > Hi, > I apologize for taking so long to review this patch. I > obviously agree > wholeheartedly with Luben. The problem I ran into while > trying to > design an enclosure management interface for the SATA > devices is that > there is all this vendor defined stuff. For example, for > the AHCI LED > protocol, the only "defined" LED is > 'activity'. For LED2 and LED3 it > is up to hardware vendors to define these. For SGPIO > there's all kinds > of ways for hw vendors to customize. I felt that it was > going to be a > maintainance nightmare to have to keep track of various > vendors > enclosure implementations in the ahci driver, and that > it'd be better > to just have user space libraries take care of that. Plus, > that way a > vendor doesn't have to get a patch into the kernel to > get their new > spiffy wizzy bang blinky lights working (think of how long > it takes > something to even get into a vendor kernel, which is what > these guys > care about...). So I'm still not sold on having an > enclosure > abstraction in the kernel - at least for the SATA > controllers.
And I agree wholeheartedly with Kristen.
Luben
| |