Re: WIP: ATA to CAM integration

Matthew Dillon wrote:
> :CAM is being expanded to be a framework for scheduling, recovery, and
> :topology management, agnostic to the transport and protocol being used.
> :SPI and SCSI are being separated into transport and protocol modules,
> :and Alexander has been amazing and kind enough to start a SATA transport
> :and ATA protocol module.  Unlike Linux, OpenBSD, or anything else out
> :there, this is not a tacked-on library for speaking SCSI/SPI at the top
> :level and then translating it to something else at a lower level.  This
> :is about speaking native SBP/RBP/ATA at the periph level and native
> :SPI/PATA/SATA/FCAL/SMP/USB at the transport level.
> :
> :So, before you continue to cast ignorant doubts on our approach and hawk
> :your incomplete wares, please at least look at what is being done on our
> :end, and make an attempt to ask some reasonable questions.
> :
> :Scott
> 
>     Huh.  Get up on the wrong side of the bed, Scott?  Just remember who
>     started making the shit comments this time.
> 
>     I have no interest with what FreeBSD is doing with CAM.

If you have no interest with what FreeBSD is doing with CAM, then your
discussion is off topic for this thread and this mailing list.  Please
take it somewhere more appropriate.

Scott