Re: new tool: blktool
From: Jeff Garzik <hidden>
Date: 2004-08-19 17:57:53
Also in:
lkml
Mark Lord wrote:
Simply dropping HDIO_DRIVE_CMD/HDIO_DRIVE_TASK into there would immediately gain full compatibility with the existing toolsets, and give some time for a newer scheme to be rolled out in the kernel, the tools, and ultimately all of the various distros.
Addendum: don't misunderstand my other emails, I do agree with what you're saying above. But random thoughts (some of which conflict with each other): * In Linux we want to keep ancient userland binaries working for as long as possible. * I don't mind HDIO_DRIVE_TASK nearly as much as HDIO_DRIVE_CMD, since the command protocol is available. But if I give in and decide that a command opcode->protocol lookup table is inevitable for supporting legacy interface, then I might as well implement both HDIO_DRIVE_TASK and HDIO_DRIVE_CMD. * OTOH, this is an excellent opportunity to _not_ implement these ioctls, if an obviously-better interface is available. Since libata and SATA are new drivers using new interfaces, it's not difficult to move things to new interfaces. * And it's not a big deal to update blktool and hdparm to use <new method X> to send ATA taskfiles, rather than existing HDIO_DRIVE_xxx. (that leaves only existing applications)