From: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley-d9PhHud1JfjCXq6kfMZ53/egYHeGw8Jk@public.gmane.org>
To: Lee Duncan <lduncan-IBi9RG/b67k@public.gmane.org>,
linux-scsi-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
Cc: linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
open-iscsi-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Use ida_simple for SCSI iSCSI transport session id
Date: Fri, 12 Feb 2016 09:54:51 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1455299691.2396.45.camel@HansenPartnership.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1455298733-18651-1-git-send-email-lduncan-IBi9RG/b67k@public.gmane.org>
On Fri, 2016-02-12 at 09:38 -0800, Lee Duncan wrote:
> The scsi_transport_iscsi module already uses the ida_simple
> routines for managing the target ID, if requested to do
> so. This change replaces an ever-increasing atomic integer
> that tracks the session ID itself with the ida_simple
> family of routines. This means that the session ID
> will be reclaimed and can be reused when the session
> is freed.
Is reusing session ID's really a good idea? For sequential sessions it
means that the ID of the next session will be re-used, i.e. the same as
the previous sessions, which could lead to target confusion. I think
local uniqueness of session IDs is more important than wrap around
because sessions are short lived entities and the chances of the same
session being alive by the time we've wrapped is pretty tiny.
If you can demostrate a multi-target problem, perhaps we should rather
fix this by making the next session id a target local quantity?
James
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "open-iscsi" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to open-iscsi+unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org
To post to this group, send email to open-iscsi-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/open-iscsi.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com>
To: Lee Duncan <lduncan@suse.com>, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, open-iscsi@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Use ida_simple for SCSI iSCSI transport session id
Date: Fri, 12 Feb 2016 09:54:51 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1455299691.2396.45.camel@HansenPartnership.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1455298733-18651-1-git-send-email-lduncan@suse.com>
On Fri, 2016-02-12 at 09:38 -0800, Lee Duncan wrote:
> The scsi_transport_iscsi module already uses the ida_simple
> routines for managing the target ID, if requested to do
> so. This change replaces an ever-increasing atomic integer
> that tracks the session ID itself with the ida_simple
> family of routines. This means that the session ID
> will be reclaimed and can be reused when the session
> is freed.
Is reusing session ID's really a good idea? For sequential sessions it
means that the ID of the next session will be re-used, i.e. the same as
the previous sessions, which could lead to target confusion. I think
local uniqueness of session IDs is more important than wrap around
because sessions are short lived entities and the chances of the same
session being alive by the time we've wrapped is pretty tiny.
If you can demostrate a multi-target problem, perhaps we should rather
fix this by making the next session id a target local quantity?
James
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-02-12 17:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-02-12 17:38 [PATCH] Use ida_simple for SCSI iSCSI transport session id Lee Duncan
2016-02-12 17:38 ` Lee Duncan
[not found] ` <1455298733-18651-1-git-send-email-lduncan-IBi9RG/b67k@public.gmane.org>
2016-02-12 17:54 ` James Bottomley [this message]
2016-02-12 17:54 ` James Bottomley
[not found] ` <1455299691.2396.45.camel-d9PhHud1JfjCXq6kfMZ53/egYHeGw8Jk@public.gmane.org>
2016-02-12 22:13 ` Mike Christie
2016-02-12 22:13 ` Mike Christie
2016-02-15 18:26 ` Chris Leech
[not found] ` <20160215182653.pvo6crry2wqwgjso-r8IHplWLGbA5tHQWs+pTeqPFFGjUI2lm2LY78lusg7I@public.gmane.org>
2016-02-16 18:40 ` Mike Christie
2016-02-16 18:40 ` Mike Christie
[not found] ` <56C36D0C.3030002-hcNo3dDEHLuVc3sceRu5cw@public.gmane.org>
2016-02-17 22:37 ` Chris Leech
2016-02-17 22:37 ` Chris Leech
2016-03-08 1:02 ` Lee Duncan
[not found] ` <56DE24A8.2060305-IBi9RG/b67k@public.gmane.org>
2016-03-08 2:15 ` Martin K. Petersen
2016-03-08 2:15 ` Martin K. Petersen
2016-03-08 17:21 ` Chris Leech
2016-03-08 17:21 ` Chris Leech
2016-03-09 8:43 ` Johannes Thumshirn
2016-03-09 8:43 ` Johannes Thumshirn
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1455299691.2396.45.camel@HansenPartnership.com \
--to=james.bottomley-d9phhud1jfjcxq6kfmz53/egyhegw8jk@public.gmane.org \
--cc=lduncan-IBi9RG/b67k@public.gmane.org \
--cc=linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org \
--cc=linux-scsi-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org \
--cc=open-iscsi-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.