Re: RFC: ATA to CAM integration patch

On Sat, 27 Jun 2009 14:22:00 +0300 Alexander Motin <mav_at_FreeBSD.org>
wrote:


> Alexander Leidinger wrote:
> > On Fri, 26 Jun 2009 21:47:26 +0300 Alexander Motin <mav_at_FreeBSD.org>
> > wrote:
> >>   - make sure that you will be able to boot if your SATA disk
> >> devices name change from some ad4 to ada0;
> > 
> > Will it stay at adaX, or is it planned to move it to daX like other
> > harddisks attached via SCSI? If it stays like it is now: what's the
> > rationale to use a different name?
> 
> It is still point of discussion. I have arguments for 3 different
> options:
>   da - PRO: habitual CAM/SCSI disk name; CONTRA: ATA disk uses 
> completely separate ATA-native peripheral driver, it is difficult use 
> the same name for two drivers and it IMHO looks ugly:

One could argue that the USB stuff which identifies itself as daX is a
completely separate peripheral driver too, but we have daX for it...

For an user it is not really interesting if it is via ATA, SCSI, or
whatever, if he wants a harddisk, he wants a harddisk and normally does
not care about the transport.

>   ad - PRO: habitual ATA disk name; CONTRA: heavily conflicts with 
> ATA_STATIC_ID ata(4) option device unit numbering, also the same
> driver name conflict, but a bit easier due to different parent bus;

I agree.

>   ada - PRO: perfect from internal infrastructure PoV; CONTRA: just 
> unhabitual.

From a personal POV, I do not care much, but from an usability POV I
don't think it's a good idea.

Bye,
Alexander.