linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] iscsi-target: Merge for .40-rc1

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:	Fri, 24 Jun 2011 11:36:36 -0500
From:	James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com>
To:	FUJITA Tomonori <fujita.tomonori@....ntt.co.jp>
Cc:	hch@....de, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, nab@...ux-iscsi.org,
	michaelc@...wisc.edu, agrover@...hat.com,
	linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] iscsi-target: Merge for .40-rc1

On Sun, 2011-06-19 at 01:55 +0900, FUJITA Tomonori wrote:
> On Mon, 30 May 2011 15:09:49 +0200
> Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de> wrote:
> 
> > On Sun, May 29, 2011 at 11:49:08AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > > I don't feel confident or motivated enough about iscsi-target, so
> > > after some (little) thought I ended up not pulling this. I really need
> > > a lot of acks from people who actually work on and care about SCSI,
> > > and right now I feel like with me being away for the next week, I
> > > can't handle it.
> > > 
> > > I just don't want to be in the situation where I pull something that
> > > is apparently contentious in the SCSI space in general, but that's
> > > _particularly_ true this release. So I'm afraid that this essentially
> > > got pushed out to the next release.
> > 
> > The main contention right now is wether to put the authentification
> > into kernel space or not.  Doing the slow path in userspace worked
> > out okay but not great on the initiator, but it has the potential
> > to become a nightmare worse than oprofile if the split ends up not
> > beeing perfect.
> 
> As I said earlier, the split is pretty simple for target code unlike
> initiator code. Doing operations before SCSI nexus establishment in
> userspace and then the kernel takes over nexuses. The information that
> the user space needs for the login negotiation is exported via
> configfs. Unlike open-iscsi split, the nexuses don't go back and forth
> between user and kernel space.
> 
> 
> > Given that we pretty well tested and working code that's used in lots
> > of production setups my vote is for taking it as-is unless someone can
> > actually show a prototype for a nicely working user/kernel split.
> 
> ok, I implemented something like that. It's not finished at all but
> my open-iscsi box successfully logged in. The daemon just passes a file
> descriptor to kernel space after the negotiation finishes.
> 
> ssh://master.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tomo/linux-2.6-misc.git lio-4.1-ud
> 
> The user space code is at:
> ssh://master.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tomo/iscsi-tcmd.git

There's been a singular lack of comments on this.

To me, the code looks reasonable (at just over 200 lines for the socket
passing.  It's extensible to support arbitrary login protocols, and it
doesn't impact the fast path at all.

Now that we have the actual code, it's a lot cleaner even than I
imagined ... is there any objection simply to doing this?

James


--
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/