linux-kernel - Re: [Scst-devel] 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: <20080206102931C.fujita.tomonori@lab.ntt.co.jp>
Date:	Wed, 06 Feb 2008 10:29:31 +0900
From:	FUJITA Tomonori <fujita.tomonori@....ntt.co.jp>
To:	matteo@...et.it
Cc:	tomof@....org, mangoo@...g.org, vst@...b.net,
	linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com,
	scst-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, fujita.tomonori@....ntt.co.jp
Subject: Re: [Scst-devel] Integration of SCST in the mainstream Linux kernel

On Tue, 05 Feb 2008 18:09:15 +0100
Matteo Tescione <matteo@...et.it> wrote:

> On 5-02-2008 14:38, "FUJITA Tomonori" <tomof@....org> wrote:
> 
> > On Tue, 05 Feb 2008 08:14:01 +0100
> > Tomasz Chmielewski <mangoo@...g.org> wrote:
> > 
> >> James Bottomley schrieb:
> >> 
> >>> These are both features being independently worked on, are they not?
> >>> Even if they weren't, the combination of the size of SCST in kernel plus
> >>> the problem of having to find a migration path for the current STGT
> >>> users still looks to me to involve the greater amount of work.
> >> 
> >> I don't want to be mean, but does anyone actually use STGT in
> >> production? Seriously?
> >> 
> >> In the latest development version of STGT, it's only possible to stop
> >> the tgtd target daemon using KILL / 9 signal - which also means all
> >> iSCSI initiator connections are corrupted when tgtd target daemon is
> >> started again (kernel upgrade, target daemon upgrade, server reboot etc.).
> > 
> > I don't know what "iSCSI initiator connections are corrupted"
> > mean. But if you reboot a server, how can an iSCSI target
> > implementation keep iSCSI tcp connections?
> > 
> > 
> >> Imagine you have to reboot all your NFS clients when you reboot your NFS
> >> server. Not only that - your data is probably corrupted, or at least the
> >> filesystem deserves checking...
> 
> Don't know if matters, but in my setup (iscsi on top of drbd+heartbeat)
> rebooting the primary server doesn't affect my iscsi traffic, SCST correctly
> manages stop/crash, by sending unit attention to clients on reconnect.
> Drbd+heartbeat correctly manages those things too.
> Still from an end-user POV, i was able to reboot/survive a crash only with
> SCST, IETD still has reconnect problems and STGT are even worst.

Please tell us on stgt-devel mailing list if you see problems. We will
try to fix them.

Thanks,
--
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/