[Xen-devel] Re: [RFC PATCH 35/35] Add Xen virtual block device driver.

[Mike Christie <michaelc@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Dave C Boutcher wrote:
> Jeff Garzik wrote:
> > Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> > > On Fri, 2006-03-24 at 08:37 -0500, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> > > > Jeff Garzik wrote:
> > > > > In fact, SCSI should make a few things easier, because the notion of 
> > > > > host+bus topology is already present, and notion of messaging is already 
> > > > > present, so you don't have to recreate that in a Xen block device 
> > > > > infrastructure.
> > > > Another benefit of SCSI:  when an IBM hypervisor in the Linux kernel 
> > > > switched to SCSI, that allowed them to replace several drivers (virt 
> > > > disk, virt cdrom, virt floppy?) with a single virt-SCSI driver.
> > > but there's a generic one for that: iSCSI
> > > so in theory you only need to provide a network driver then ;)
> > Talk about lots of overhead :)
> >
> > OTOH, I bet that T10 is acting at high speed, right this second, to form 
> > a committee, and multiple sub-committees, to standardize SCSI 
> > transported over XenBus.  SXP anyone?  :)
> Actually SRP (which T10 has now stopped working on) fits the bill very
> nicely.
Does the IBM vscsi code/SPEC follow the SRP SPEC or is it slightly 
modified? We also have a SRP initiator in kernel now too. It is just not 
in the drivers/scsi dir.
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel