Followup to: <20020714003425.GC29007@codepoet.org>
By author: Erik Andersen <andersen@codepoet.org>
In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel
>
> Of course making user space do this is pretty lame. But we
> have a much better way. Each cdrom device registers with the
> uniform cdrom driver, which can easily assign each registered
> cdrom device a major and minor. That scanning for cdroms would
> be as simple as
> for i in /dev/cdrom* ; do
> open ($i, O_RDONLY|O_NONBLOCK)) < 0) {
> /* Found a cdrom drive */
> }
>
Yes, something like that would be nice.
However, the case still remains that I think Linus' proposed overall
packet infrastructure is the right thing to do. That way a uniform
API would be available for poking at any device that supports MMC (is
that the correct term these days?) commands, regardless of the type
of device and the lower-level transports.
People have -- correctly -- corrected me on the "ATAPI = SCSI over
IDE" issue. When I think of SCSI, I tend to think of what a network
engineer would call "the upper data link layer", i.e. the command
packet frame format. I did not mean to imply that the physical
interface (PHY), or the lower data link layer (MAC) where the same. I
also realize that there are differences, but *from what I've seen*
they seem to be relatively minor.
I meant to start a discussion, not "call a vote", especially not
w.r.t. the lower-level implementation details.
-hpa
-- <hpa@transmeta.com> at work, <hpa@zytor.com> in private! "Unix gives you enough rope to shoot yourself in the foot." http://www.zytor.com/~hpa/puzzle.txt <amsp@zytor.com> - 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 : Tue Jul 23 2002 - 22:00:18 EST