From: Uday Shankar <ushankar@purestorage.com>
To: Ewan Milne <emilne@redhat.com>
Cc: Brian Bunker <brian@purestorage.com>, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] scsi: scsi_scan purge devices no longer in reported LUN list
Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2022 11:40:36 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220728174036.GA3910842@dev-ushankar.dev.purestorage.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAGtn9rmV=SCxPEegyPc_9zxd9u4+R02LKc3B2X6uK0osY-zWww@mail.gmail.com>
> but there are several cases where this is undesirable so I do not
> think the kernel should do it.
> Having userspace handle policy decisions allows for more flexibility.
Ewan, could you elaborate on this point? A volume ACL removal on the
target is not a transient disruption to access to the volume - it is
permanent and deliberate. Keeping the device data structures around on
the host paints a false picture for applications, as if those devices
are still accessible. Moreover, if a new volume is connected with the
same LUN, the old device nodes are re-used with no indication to the
application that the underlying volume has changed. As Brian showed
above, this behavior can cause corruption when devices are accessed via
multipath.
Sure, this can be avoided via a manual rescan-scsi-bus.sh -r after
removing volume ACLs. But we already have automatic scanning of the
target upon receiving the REPORTED_LUNS_DATA_HAS_CHANGED UA, and it
seems unnecessarily asymmetric for this scanning to have the ability to
create new devices but not delete old ones.
As far as policy decisions go, NVMe has in-kernel scanning which can
both add and remove devices. Is it a protocol difference that prevents
SCSI from doing the same?
Thanks,
Uday
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-07-28 17:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-01-14 22:02 [PATCH] scsi: scsi_scan purge devices no longer in reported LUN list Brian Bunker
2022-02-07 20:53 ` Ewan Milne
2022-07-28 17:40 ` Uday Shankar [this message]
2022-07-29 23:38 ` Uday Shankar
2022-09-08 18:50 ` Uday Shankar
2023-07-06 16:58 ` Brian Bunker
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=20220728174036.GA3910842@dev-ushankar.dev.purestorage.com \
--to=ushankar@purestorage.com \
--cc=brian@purestorage.com \
--cc=emilne@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox