RE: 5.x branch mainline kernel push in two weeks?

RE: 5.x branch mainline kernel push in two weeks?

[Duane Grigsby]

No, that's not true; we are TOTALLY committed to getting all of our
drivers in the upstream kernel. I have been working on the ISCSI driver
cleanup to the level of our Fibre Channel driver as Andrew has done. I'm
making it conform to the current linux-scsi API, ISCSI transport, and
stripping out all of the failover baggage. My goal is the have something
upstream in 2 - 3 weeks, if not before.   

-----Original Message-----
From: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org
[mailto:linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Christoph Hellwig
Sent: Wednesday, April 20, 2005 1:49 AM
To: open-iscsi@googlegroups.com
Cc: linux-iscsi development team; linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: 5.x branch mainline kernel push in two weeks?

On Wed, Apr 20, 2005 at 01:29:11AM -0700, Mike Christie wrote:
> Are you going to try and push someone like qla4010 which has a similar

> interface to qla2xxx (it uses the msg box interface) to use the
netlink 
> interface? With a lot of the iscsi stuff masked away it seems a little

> difficult to go the extent open-iscsi did?

I'm not sure we should care too much about the qla4xxx driver.  It's
never been posted to linux-scsi, and the driver they pushed to SuSE
ignores everything we've said about scsi low-level drivers.  It looks
like the iSCSI part of Qlogic simply doesn't care about Linux (that is
upstream, not the major forks)
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: 5.x branch mainline kernel push in two weeks?

[Christoph Hellwig]

On Wed, Apr 20, 2005 at 11:29:12AM -0700, Duane Grigsby wrote:
> No, that's not true; we are TOTALLY committed to getting all of our
> drivers in the upstream kernel. I have been working on the ISCSI driver
> cleanup to the level of our Fibre Channel driver as Andrew has done. I'm
> making it conform to the current linux-scsi API, ISCSI transport, and
> stripping out all of the failover baggage. My goal is the have something
> upstream in 2 - 3 weeks, if not before.   

Okay, sorry for implying the opposite.

So what API are you using for communicating with userspace right now?
How much userspace support do you need?  Is the current iscsi transport
class okay with you and what about the netlink version?

It would be very helpful to have you participating on the various iscsi
transport class and userspace interface discussions.

RE: 5.x branch mainline kernel push in two weeks?

[Dmitry Yusupov]

On Wed, 2005-04-20 at 11:29 -0700, Duane Grigsby wrote:
> No, that's not true; we are TOTALLY committed to getting all of our
> drivers in the upstream kernel. I have been working on the ISCSI driver
> cleanup to the level of our Fibre Channel driver as Andrew has done. I'm
> making it conform to the current linux-scsi API, ISCSI transport, and
> stripping out all of the failover baggage. My goal is the have something
> upstream in 2 - 3 weeks, if not before.   

But don't you think it is better to have integrated solution for all
iSCSI transports including QLogic's HBA and have unified user-space set
of tools? How about collaborate on this issue and come up with somewhat
generic which will fit with ongoing efforts we have today:
 
1) iSCSI/TCP
2) your QLogic's HBA
3) iSER/IB

I think those three projects combined could come up with generic iSCSI
solution(including user-space tools and API) which will really fit for
everyone else on the planet.

It would be really nice if you would participate in ongoing interface
discussion on next mailing lists:

1) linux-iscsi-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
2) open-iscsi@googlegroups.com
3) iscsitarget-devel@lists.sourceforge.net

Thanks!

> -----Original Message-----
> From: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org
> [mailto:linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Christoph Hellwig
> Sent: Wednesday, April 20, 2005 1:49 AM
> To: open-iscsi@googlegroups.com
> Cc: linux-iscsi development team; linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org
> Subject: Re: 5.x branch mainline kernel push in two weeks?
> 
> On Wed, Apr 20, 2005 at 01:29:11AM -0700, Mike Christie wrote:
> > Are you going to try and push someone like qla4010 which has a similar
> 
> > interface to qla2xxx (it uses the msg box interface) to use the
> netlink 
> > interface? With a lot of the iscsi stuff masked away it seems a little
> 
> > difficult to go the extent open-iscsi did?
> 
> I'm not sure we should care too much about the qla4xxx driver.  It's
> never been posted to linux-scsi, and the driver they pushed to SuSE
> ignores everything we've said about scsi low-level drivers.  It looks
> like the iSCSI part of Qlogic simply doesn't care about Linux (that is
> upstream, not the major forks)
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> 
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

RE: 5.x branch mainline kernel push in two weeks?

[Duane Grigsby]

Ok, I'll get on those discussions.

-----Original Message-----
From: Dmitry Yusupov [mailto:dmitry_yus@yahoo.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, April 20, 2005 11:50 AM
To: Duane Grigsby
Cc: Christoph Hellwig; open-iscsi@googlegroups.com; linux-iscsi
development team; linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org
Subject: RE: 5.x branch mainline kernel push in two weeks?

On Wed, 2005-04-20 at 11:29 -0700, Duane Grigsby wrote:
> No, that's not true; we are TOTALLY committed to getting all of our
> drivers in the upstream kernel. I have been working on the ISCSI
driver
> cleanup to the level of our Fibre Channel driver as Andrew has done.
I'm
> making it conform to the current linux-scsi API, ISCSI transport, and
> stripping out all of the failover baggage. My goal is the have
something
> upstream in 2 - 3 weeks, if not before.   

But don't you think it is better to have integrated solution for all
iSCSI transports including QLogic's HBA and have unified user-space set
of tools? How about collaborate on this issue and come up with somewhat
generic which will fit with ongoing efforts we have today:
 
1) iSCSI/TCP
2) your QLogic's HBA
3) iSER/IB

I think those three projects combined could come up with generic iSCSI
solution(including user-space tools and API) which will really fit for
everyone else on the planet.

It would be really nice if you would participate in ongoing interface
discussion on next mailing lists:

1) linux-iscsi-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
2) open-iscsi@googlegroups.com
3) iscsitarget-devel@lists.sourceforge.net

Thanks!

> -----Original Message-----
> From: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org
> [mailto:linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Christoph
Hellwig
> Sent: Wednesday, April 20, 2005 1:49 AM
> To: open-iscsi@googlegroups.com
> Cc: linux-iscsi development team; linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org
> Subject: Re: 5.x branch mainline kernel push in two weeks?
> 
> On Wed, Apr 20, 2005 at 01:29:11AM -0700, Mike Christie wrote:
> > Are you going to try and push someone like qla4010 which has a
similar
> 
> > interface to qla2xxx (it uses the msg box interface) to use the
> netlink 
> > interface? With a lot of the iscsi stuff masked away it seems a
little
> 
> > difficult to go the extent open-iscsi did?
> 
> I'm not sure we should care too much about the qla4xxx driver.  It's
> never been posted to linux-scsi, and the driver they pushed to SuSE
> ignores everything we've said about scsi low-level drivers.  It looks
> like the iSCSI part of Qlogic simply doesn't care about Linux (that is
> upstream, not the major forks)
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi"
in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> 
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi"
in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

RE: 5.x branch mainline kernel push in two weeks?

[Duane Grigsby]

So what API are you using for communicating with userspace right now?
How much userspace support do you need?  Is the current iscsi transport
class okay with you and what about the netlink version?
>> the current driver uses ioctls, but I will be looking at what we need
to do to replace that with the ISCSI transport mechanism. 

How much userspace support do you need?  Is the current iscsi transport
class okay with you and what about the netlink version?
>> Good question, I'm still looking into that. Not sure about netlink
version, I don't think the iscsi driver needs it. 

It would be very helpful to have you participating on the various iscsi
transport class and userspace interface discussions.
>> I would be glad to participate in those discussions.  
 

Re: 5.x branch mainline kernel push in two weeks?

[Christoph Hellwig]

On Wed, Apr 20, 2005 at 01:29:11AM -0700, Mike Christie wrote:
> Are you going to try and push someone like qla4010 which has a similar 
> interface to qla2xxx (it uses the msg box interface) to use the netlink 
> interface? With a lot of the iscsi stuff masked away it seems a little 
> difficult to go the extent open-iscsi did?

I'm not sure we should care too much about the qla4xxx driver.  It's
never been posted to linux-scsi, and the driver they pushed to SuSE
ignores everything we've said about scsi low-level drivers.  It looks
like the iSCSI part of Qlogic simply doesn't care about Linux (that is
upstream, not the major forks)