[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <BANLkTi==bZ0h3o5FNrg8PSJFp6F-zh5hTA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 18 May 2011 12:17:21 -0700
From: Roland Dreier <roland@...estorage.com>
To: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@....org>
Cc: Jason Gunthorpe <jgunthorpe@...idianresearch.com>,
"Nicholas A. Bellinger" <nab@...ux-iscsi.org>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-scsi <linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-rmda <linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org>,
Vu Pham <vu@...lanox.com>, David Dillow <dillowda@...l.gov>,
James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senpartnership.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC] ib_srpt: initial .40-rc1 drivers/infiniband/ulp/srpt merge
On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 11:02 AM, Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@....org> wrote:
> Thanks for the feedback. I'm still wondering though about the
> usefulness of disabling / enabling SRPT per HCA port. For the use
> cases I know about SRP communication over all target ports will be
> enabled as soon as target configuration has finished and more
> fine-grained access configuration will occur by allowing/disallowing
> certain initiators to log in.
I definitely think that allowing the flexibility to configure ports individually
is required. It's easy to imagine a case with a separate front-end and
back-end networks on the two HCA ports (this would be a pretty normal
ethernet config), where only one port should be a target port.
It may not be how people do things now but it should at least be possible.
- R.
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists