Re: WIP: ATA to CAM integration

:Every one of Matt's emails follow this formula:
:
:1. I don't know how FOO works, but how you're doing it is wrong
:2. Here's how I think FOO should work
:3. I'm going to work on FOO in DragonFlyBSD and have it done in a week.
:
:1 and 2 are ignorant and worthless in a technical conversation, and 3 is
:off topic for FreeBSD mailing lists. So yes, I'm calling him out.
:
:Scott

Well, so far about the only one talking shit here is you, Scott.

Insofar as 3. goes, I already provided references to that code,
because the purpose is to share code. I wonder if you even bothered
to look at it. Judging from your comments, I guess not. It isn't
quite in the decrepit shape you make it out to be. I mean, come on,
not even the ATA driver has hot-plug support (not without crashing,
anyhow), and I would not characterize IT as being decrepit!

It was simply a code reference, along with OpenBSD's code reference.
For anyone writing a driver having multiple code references is always
beneficial, it saves a lot of time and puts things in context.
After all, OpenBSD's and Linux's AHCI driver is what really opened
up the space for the rest of us. OpenBSD saved me at least 100
man-hours of work and Alex just now saved me another 8 or 9 at
the cost of a 5 minute email. That seems to be a good use of the
mailing lists in my view.

I'm not above asking other driver writers for information that I
do not have complete knowledge of. I learned a lot from Alexander
Motin's posting with regards to port multipliers, enough that I
am now quite comfortable in my ability to add the feature in my own
work. Clearly I am not totally deficient in my knowledege since I
actually did port the OpenBSD driver to DragonFly.

As far as I can tell, I haven't said anything about anyone doing it
wrong, certainly not with the tone your extremely jaded portrayal
seems to be applying to my posting. I have my opinion and you have
yours, but that's all it is... an opinion. My opinion is that the
only portable device I/O command set available in the world today is
the SCSI command set. There is no ulterior motive, it's just an
opinion.

I guess it is in the eye of the beholder.

-Matt

_______________________________________________
freebsd-current@xxxxxxxxxxx mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxx"

Relevant Pages

  • Re: WIP: ATA to CAM integration
    ... I don't know how FOO works, but how you're doing it is wrong ... It was simply a code reference, ... For anyone writing a driver having multiple code references is always ... I have my opinion and you have ...
    (freebsd-arch)
  • [PATCH] Add module_name Kconfig shortcut
    ... "To compile this driver as a module, ... config FOO ... struct symbol *sym; ...
    (Linux-Kernel)
  • Re: distributed module configuration
    ... tristate "do you want foo?" ... by reducing a driver with one file. ... Agreed - simple drivers would then be a single file - and thats a good argument. ... (and sometime in the Makefile there are some wrong hacks). ...
    (Linux-Kernel)
  • [RFC] Pushing device/driver binding decisions to userspace
    ... Driver foo supports devices a, ... So this then becomes a decision that the kernel cannot make. ... So my ultimate goal is to somehow move this decision making to udev. ...
    (Linux-Kernel)