This message is from the T13 list server.
Way too many people respond privately...
1) SATA secret society
[full disclosure: I have NDAs with several SATA-related companies, in
order to do Linux SATA drivers]
SATA development could be a lot more open, yes.
In particular, the 32-command limit of SATA NCQ is fairly silly,
provides no advantages at the bus level, and forces drive manufacturers
in turn to artificially limit their devices' queueing
capabilities/performance.
This feature could have gotten a LOT more discussion.
2) Disband T13?
I would actually lean towards a split rather than disband:
T13 -> shepherd of ATA command set (features!)
Parallel ATA -> new entity, liase w/ T13 for command set
Serial ATA -> new entity, liase w/ T13 for command set
This preserves enough of the infrastructure to keep things useful and
efficient, while allowing PATA to avoid being adversely affected by
changes in SATA land.
If there aren't enough people to care about a new entity for PATA, no
big deal. The two-entity structure would serve to preserve PATA, while
allowing SATA development to continue at a brisk pace.
Jeff
