linux-kernel - Re: Integration of SCST in the mainstream Linux kernel

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <47A06218.7020006@vlnb.net>
Date:	Wed, 30 Jan 2008 14:40:08 +0300
From:	Vladislav Bolkhovitin <vst@...b.net>
To:	FUJITA Tomonori <tomof@....org>
CC:	bart.vanassche@...il.com, fujita.tomonori@....ntt.co.jp,
	rdreier@...co.com, James.Bottomley@...senpartnership.com,
	torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org, scst-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Integration of SCST in the mainstream Linux kernel

FUJITA Tomonori wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Jan 2008 09:38:04 +0100
> "Bart Van Assche" <bart.vanassche@...il.com> wrote:
> 
> 
>>On Jan 30, 2008 12:32 AM, FUJITA Tomonori <fujita.tomonori@....ntt.co.jp> wrote:
>>
>>>iSER has parameters to limit the maximum size of RDMA (it needs to
>>>repeat RDMA with a poor configuration)?
>>
>>Please specify which parameters you are referring to. As you know I
> 
> 
> Sorry, I can't say. I don't know much about iSER. But seems that Pete
> and Robin can get the better I/O performance - line speed ratio with
> STGT.
> 
> The version of OpenIB might matters too. For example, Pete said that
> STGT reads loses about 100 MB/s for some transfer sizes for some
> transfer sizes due to the OpenIB version difference or other unclear
> reasons.
> 
> http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.iscsi.tgt.devel/135
> 
> It's fair to say that it takes long time and need lots of knowledge to
> get the maximum performance of SAN, I think.
> 
> I think that it would be easier to convince James with the detailed
> analysis (e.g. where does it take so long, like Pete did), not just
> 'dd' performance results.
> 
> Pushing iSCSI target code into mainline failed four times: IET, SCST,
> STGT (doing I/Os in kernel in the past), and PyX's one (*1). iSCSI
> target code is huge. You said SCST comprises 14,000 lines, but it's
> not iSCSI target code. The SCSI engine code comprises 14,000
> lines. You need another 10,000 lines for the iSCSI driver. Note that
> SCST's iSCSI driver provides only basic iSCSI features. PyX's iSCSI
> target code implemenents more iSCSI features (like MC/S, ERL2, etc)
> and comprises about 60,000 lines and it still lacks some features like
> iSER, bidi, etc.
> 
> I think that it's reasonable to say that we need more than 'dd'
> results before pushing about possible more than 60,000 lines to
> mainline.

Tomo, please stop counting in-kernel lines only (see 
http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/4/24/364). The amount of the overall project 
lines for the same feature set is a lot more important.

> (*1) http://linux-iscsi.org/
> 

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/