linux-kernel - Re: [Scst-devel] Fwd: Re: linuxcon 2010...

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]

Date:	Wed, 18 Aug 2010 18:19:24 +0200
From:	Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@....org>
To:	James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...e.de>
Cc:	Chetan Loke <generationgnu@...oo.com>,
	Vladislav Bolkhovitin <vst@...b.net>,
	scst-devel <scst-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Scst-devel] Fwd: Re: linuxcon 2010...

On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 5:11 PM, James Bottomley
<James.Bottomley@...e.de> wrote:
> On Wed, 2010-08-18 at 07:58 -0700, Chetan Loke wrote:
>> Hello James and others,
>>
>> --- On Tue, 8/17/10, James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...e.de> wrote:
>>
>> > From: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...e.de>
>> > Subject: Re: [Scst-devel] Fwd: Re:  linuxcon 2010...
>> > To: "Vladislav Bolkhovitin" <vst@...b.net>
>> > Cc: "scst-devel" <scst-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org
>> > Date: Tuesday, August 17, 2010, 8:30 PM
>> > On Mon, 2010-08-16 at 20:20 +0400,
>> > Vladislav Bolkhovitin wrote:
>> > > Hello James,
>> > >
>> > > Could you comment rumors that decision about future
>> > Linux SCSI target
>> > > subsystem is done as well as other related rumors:
>> >
>> > If this is related to LSF, the notes on the I/O track are
>> > here:
>> >
>> > http://lwn.net/Articles/400491/
>>
>>
>> During the open panel, my question was really specific -
>>
>> Q) What is the future of a SCSI-target subsystem in linux. Which
>>    target engine/subsystem can we expect?
>>
>> Your answer) There is place for only 1 target-subsystem in the Linux
>> scsi stack and in the LSF summit the decision was taken to merge LIO.
>> Has that
>> decision changed since the summit?
>
> The decision hasn't been taken to merge LIO, but based on what happened
> at the summit, I think it's the most viable candidate and will likely be
> merged by 2.6.37
>
>> As a scst-user what I would like to understand is, what was that
>> decision based on? Because the LSF summit was 'small by invitation'
>> only summit. The notes don't give us an insight on the selection
>> criteria/merits etc.
>
> The notes list 3, what's unclear about it?

Hello James,

Thanks for taking notes during the storage track and sharing these
notes (http://lwn.net/Articles/400589/). These notes are interesting
but do not reveal why LIO is preferred.

Also, the list with the three acceptance criteria is incomplete. A
very important criterion before any kernel code can be merged upstream
is whether or not there is a maintainer for that code. Someone who has
proven prior kernel coding experience and someone who understands the
new code thoroughly.

Bart.
--
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/