All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Scott M. Ferris" <sferris@acm.org>
To: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@SteelEye.com>
Cc: Mike Christie <mikenc@us.ibm.com>,
	Mike Christie <michaelc@cs.wisc.edu>,
	Matthew Wilcox <willy@debian.org>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
	iscsi -devel <linux-iscsi-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>,
	David Wysochanski <davidw@netapp.com>,
	"Surekha.PC" <surekhap@cisco.com>,
	SCSI Mailing List <linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [linux-iscsi-devel] Re: [PATCH RFC] replace ioctl for sysfs take 2
Date: Tue, 7 Sep 2004 14:19:18 -0500 (CDT)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20040907191918.C045E76C56@isis.visi.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1094571319.1716.108.camel@mulgrave> from James Bottomley at "Sep 7, 2004 10:43:00 am"

James Bottomley wrote:
>
> A host is the analogue of a bus.  

That's not a very helpful analogy, since only SPI and FC-AL resemble a
bus, and all of the newer SCSI transports are switched fabrics.

> In iSCSI that's really the other end point.  Using abstractions
> incorrectly (like a single host for the entire iSCSI system) is
> bound to end up with problems due to the concept mismatch.

I have trouble understanding your viewpoint.  Your answers to the
following questions will hopefully clear things up.

Do you think Linux hosts should be used in a similar way by all
switched SCSI transports (e.g. FC-SW, iSCSI, SAS)?  If not, why not?

Do you think switched SCSI transports should allocate one Linux host
for each I_T nexus?

Do you think switched SCSI transports should allocate one Linux host
for each (SAM-2 or SAM-3) SCSI initiator port?

Do you think switched SCSI transports should allocate one Linux host
for each (SAM-2 or SAM-3) SCSI initiator device?

-- 
Scott M. Ferris,
sferris@acm.org 

  reply	other threads:[~2004-09-07 19:19 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <413557CB.8010008@cs.wisc.edu>
     [not found] ` <20040901162042.GC26753@null.msp.redhat.com>
2004-09-06 14:32   ` [linux-iscsi-devel] Re: [PATCH RFC] replace ioctl for sysfs take 2 Christoph Hellwig
2004-09-06 16:33     ` Matthew Wilcox
2004-09-06 18:15       ` Mike Christie
2004-09-06 18:54         ` Mike Christie
2004-09-06 22:48           ` Mike Christie
2004-09-06 23:11             ` James Bottomley
2004-09-07  2:46               ` Mike Christie
2004-09-07 15:35                 ` James Bottomley
2004-09-07 19:19                   ` Scott M. Ferris [this message]
2004-09-07 20:42                     ` James Bottomley
2004-09-07 21:05                       ` Scott M. Ferris
2004-09-07 21:12                         ` Mike Christie
2004-09-07 21:24                           ` Scott M. Ferris
2004-09-07 21:33                           ` James Bottomley
2004-09-07 21:37                             ` Mike Christie
2004-09-07 22:05                               ` James Bottomley
2004-09-07 22:40                                 ` Mike Christie
2004-09-07 22:57                                   ` Mike Christie
2004-09-08 10:27                                     ` Mike Christie
2004-09-07 23:34                                   ` James Bottomley
2004-09-08  9:19                                     ` Mike Christie
2004-09-08 14:53                                       ` James Bottomley
2004-09-07 21:14                         ` James Bottomley
2004-09-08  2:33                         ` Douglas Gilbert
2004-09-08 14:38                           ` Randy.Dunlap
2004-09-08 18:11                             ` Bryan Henderson
2004-09-09  0:40                             ` Douglas Gilbert
2004-09-09 15:40                               ` AJ Lewis
2004-09-07 15:24         ` AJ Lewis

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=20040907191918.C045E76C56@isis.visi.com \
    --to=sferris@acm.org \
    --cc=James.Bottomley@SteelEye.com \
    --cc=davidw@netapp.com \
    --cc=hch@lst.de \
    --cc=linux-iscsi-devel@lists.sourceforge.net \
    --cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=michaelc@cs.wisc.edu \
    --cc=mikenc@us.ibm.com \
    --cc=surekhap@cisco.com \
    --cc=willy@debian.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.