AH, I did not know that. But that raises another question. FreeBSD already has a SCSI target framework, so how does this NetBSD code fit into that? Or are you suggesting that consistency isn't important? Scott Maxim Sobolev wrote: > Scott, > > It seems that you aren't aware that Intel/NetBSD implementation is > completely userland one and it uses any block device/file as backing > store (no interaction with CAM). Therefore, it won't interfere with > whatever work you and others do in the CAM area. > > -Maxim > > Scott Long wrote: > >> Maxim Sobolev wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> I wonder if anybody has any objections to importing iSCSI target >>> daemon from NetBSD (Intel) into the base. >>> >>> -Maxim >> >> >> Yes. I'm nearing completion of locking CAM, and adding new subsystems >> is not going >> to help that effort at the moment. I'd also like you to talk with >> Matt Jacob and Nate Lawson >> about it since they have quite a bit of current experience with the >> SCSI target side of things. >> So in other words, a drive-by commit is not welcome and will be >> drive-by uncommitted unless >> you work with the people who can provide help and guidance. >> >> Scott >> >> _______________________________________________ >> freebsd-current_at_freebsd.org mailing list >> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current >> To unsubscribe, send any mail to >> "freebsd-current-unsubscribe_at_freebsd.org" >> >> >Received on Mon May 29 2006 - 20:19:36 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:38:56 UTC