Re: [PATCH 1/7] qla4xxx: added BSG support

[Ravi Anand <ravi.anand@qlogic.com>]

James,

Haven't heard anything from you yet on this front. So we were wondering
should we assume that you are OK with this approach ?

We are already investigating the user space part, so just want to make
sure we are heading in the right direction.

Thanks
Ravi


>On Mon, 24 May 2010, Vikas Chaudhary wrote:
> James,
> 
> Looks like Ravi's posting never made to the reflector.
> Resending Ravi's original posting again.
> 
> We wanted to conform from you whether passing data blob through bsg interface is agreeable to with you?
> If we go through this approach we will provide user-space library which will allow iscsiadm
> to configure HBA. We will work with Mike Christie to integrate user-space library with iscsiadm.
> 
> Looking forward for your feedback.
> 
> Thanks,
> Vikas.
> 
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: Ravi Anand
> >Sent: Tuesday, May 11, 2010 7:15 PM
> >To: Mike Christie
> >Cc: Vikas Chaudhary; james.bottomley@suse.de; linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org
> >Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/7] qla4xxx: added BSG support
> >
> >
> >On May 11, 2010, at 8:51 AM, Mike Christie wrote:
> >
> >
> >> I think we need James's comments on this one. I am not sure what is
> >> right.
> >>
> >> On 05/11/2010 02:55 AM, Vikas Chaudhary wrote:
> >>
> >>> This BSG interface is on top of patch :
> >>> http://marc.info/?l=linux-scsi&m=126884917217355&w=2
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >> All I want to be able to do is allow any app to be able to config any
> >> iscsi cards. I want to support Qlogic apps, but then I also want to
> >> support iscsiadm, virt tools, installers, boot tools, etc.
> >>
> >>
> >
> >Completely agree. Supporting our  Qlogic app's is one part of the
> >puzzle.
> >But our goal is to allow end user's to manage our cards using *iscsiadm*
> >and seamlessly integrate it with other tools which you have listed.
> >
> >
> >>
> >>
> >>> +	case ISCSI_BSG_HST_VENDOR:
> >>> +		rval = qla4xxx_process_vendor_specific(job);
> >>> +		break;
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >> I like the idea of allowing you to use the ISCSI_BSG_HST_VENDOR for
> >> all
> >> your commands, because it makes the kernel code so very very
> >> simple. If
> >> you guys can provide a userspace gpl friendly lib or plugin to a lib
> >> like IMA that allows distros tools to manage your card, then I am
> >> happy
> >> with this approach.
> >>
> >
> >Definitely. We will work internally to figure out on how to move forward
> >interms of providing a plugin for userspace which can be integrated with
> >iscsiadm - most probably it will be an IMA plugin.
> >
> >But  I would say we need few weeks to figure this out.
> >Let me get back to you on this one  as we need to work with another
> >group who handles the API part internally.
> >
> >
> >> My concern with this is that, it takes you guys so long to get things
> >> out. We have no idea when or if it will ever be done.
> >>
> >>
> >
> >Let me just say that, we will get this effort going ASAP once we get
> >the basic pieces done which will allow our API/Application to
> >configure the card using
> >bsg interface.
> >
> >And btw we need to do this bsg piece anyway - it does not matter whether
> >its Qlogic App's or iscsiadm as it will require change in our API.
> >
> >
> >>
> >>
> >>> +	case ISCSI_BSG_HST_NET_CONFIG:
> >>> +		printk(KERN_ERR "ISCSI_BSG_HST_NET_CONFIG Commands "
> >>> +		    "NOT Supported\n");
> >>> +		rval = -ENOSYS;
> >>> +		break;
> >>>
> >>
> >> OTOH, I like the idea of ethtool like interface where for common
> >> operations there is a command command. Then the driver takes that
> >> info/cmd and does its vendor specifics.
> >>
> >>
> >> James, someone mentioned that in the past you might have said it is ok
> >> to pass blobs around if it gets passed down directly to hardware. This
> >> is the case for qla4xxx here. Is it ok to let them just use the
> >> HST_VENDOR command?
> >>
> >
> >Looking forward to James comment.
> >
> >Thanks
> >Ravi