Followup to: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10201011521190.6558-100000@master.linux-ide.org>
By author: Andre Hedrick <andre@linux-ide.org>
In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel
>
> Well if hell freezes over and I die, the patches to make the driver
> handled clean low_level IO threading will never be accepted. Because they
> model the state-diagrams of the physical layer of the hardware exactly in
> the transport layer, it is totally orthoginal to the darwinism of Linux.
> Design is a problem, it is not permitted in a darwin-evolution model.
>
I was trying to figure out what certain peoples issue with this was,
and the answer I got back was concern about buggy hardware (both host
side and target side) breaking the documented model. I am personally
in no position to evaluate the veracity of that claim; perhaps you
could comment on how to deal with broken hardware in your model.
-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 : Mon Jan 07 2002 - 21:00:16 EST