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]

Message-ID: <AANLkTikbyEtMiJ2ii3TreJGsbqz4Kf61WvzkwFDDOo4L@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Tue, 24 Aug 2010 08:01:06 -0500
From:	Chris Weiss <cweiss@...il.com>
To:	James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...e.de>
Cc:	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 Mon, Aug 23, 2010 at 3:38 PM, James Bottomley
<James.Bottomley@...e.de> wrote:
>      * STGT users should just migrate to scst_local
>      * STGT doesn't have enough users to bother with
>      * STGT has fundamental design flaws which makes its pass through
>        architecture unusable and its ABI flawed.
>
> I'm sure STGT appreciates the frank assessments, but it doesn't seem to
> merit too many "plays well with others" points.

I get what you are saying, and I haven't use STGT, but if these things
are true (especially the last), well truth sometimes hurts,
and if they aren't true, why replace the target anyway?

There is also some precedence for dropping features, at least
temporarily and sometimes longer, to move to a new backend.  In fact I
have a fax server that I still have to run on a specific 2.4 kernel
version because latter 2.4's and all 2.6's serial subsystem don't
quite work right with the old hardware.  Sometimes you do have to drop
some old code to move forward, and hope someone that cares will fix
it, and sometimes there really is not enough users to bother with.

I haven't tried using LIO for nearly 3 years, at which point I was not
able to connect a VMware ESX initiator and transfer data reliably, and
Nick really didn't seem to care.  SCST works, and Vlad worked quite
hard helping me both with config issues and code patches to making it
rock stable with great performance.  If my memory serves, at the time
STGT was documented to have issues with ESX so i didn't even bother
testing it.  I also rarely see any technical conversation on LIO
lists, I actually thought the project had gone slightly stale or
niche, until this thread.

Let me also toss this out there:
How many commercial iscsi products are based on LIO, and certified to
work with other commercial products?
I don't ask this because I think the kernel should listen to the whims
of commercial products, I ask because working with things that aren't
Linux is a clear sign of "plays well with others".  Does LIO actually
play well with others, not just its lead developer?
--
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/