From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: James Bottomley Subject: Re: [linux-iscsi-devel] Re: [PATCH RFC] replace ioctl for sysfs take 2 Date: 07 Sep 2004 17:33:36 -0400 Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org Message-ID: <1094592818.1716.159.camel@mulgrave> References: <20040907210520.0251476C56@isis.visi.com> <413E2440.8080509@cs.wisc.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from stat16.steeleye.com ([209.192.50.48]:64180 "EHLO hancock.sc.steeleye.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S268663AbUIGVgX (ORCPT ); Tue, 7 Sep 2004 17:36:23 -0400 In-Reply-To: <413E2440.8080509@cs.wisc.edu> List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: Mike Christie Cc: "Scott M. Ferris" , Mike Christie , Matthew Wilcox , Christoph Hellwig , iscsi -devel , David Wysochanski , "Surekha.PC" , SCSI Mailing List On Tue, 2004-09-07 at 17:12, Mike Christie wrote: > > This is exactly why I ask these questions. The iSCSI driver > > developers just implemented this, because they thought this is what > > you and Christoph were asking for. Apparently it's not what you > > wanted. > > Thank you for clarifying this. So we should go back to a single linux host, > right? The iscsi session is an I_T nexus, so the only way to store the > session state in the host is to allocate a session per host. No; for iscsi, the host and target for I_T is the right thing to do. The reason why doesn't lie in terminology or a specification, it lies in the code. When the cisco-iscsi driver was first presented, it had a single host for everything and a huge connection management resource array hanging off that. This was clearly wrong beacuse there was a huge overhead managing the array. The correct approach was to make the host correspond to a single element of that array and use the mid-layer host management functions instead of home grown resource management functions. Doing it this way makes both the management and presentation of the information more logical and the code cleaner. James