On Wed, Jan 02 2002, David Brownell wrote:
> > > OK, I think I'm clear on this much then: in 2.5, to support block drivers
> > > over USB (usb-storage only, for now) there needs to be an addition to
> > > the buffer addressing model in usbcore, as exposed by URBs.
> > >
> > > - Current "transfer_buffer" + "transfer_buffer_length" mode needs to
> > > stay, since most drivers aren't block drivers.
> >
> > Why? Surely USB block drivers are not the only ones that want to support
> > highmem.
>
> Once the capability is there, it'll find other uses. But allowing
> them is not the same as requiring them. Getting rid of the current
> model would break every USB driver, rather than just ones that want to
> support highmem.
So? Either you want to fix this now, or leave it that way forever. Just
IMO of course, but you might as well just make a clean break.
> > > - Add some kind of "page + offset" addressing model.
> >
> > Yes
> >
> > > Discussion of details can be taken off LKML, it'd seem. Though
> > > I'm curious when the scatterlist->address field will vanish,
> > > making these changes a requirement. Is that a 2.5.2 thing?
> >
> > Maybe 2.5.3, dunno for sure.
>
> A bit of a delay would make things a bit easier ... :) Of course, if
> scatterlist->address doesn't work any more, it won't matter much.
A bit of delay will only make things worse, afaics.
-- Jens Axboe- 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/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Jan 07 2002 - 21:00:18 EST