From: Vladislav Bolkhovitin <vst@vlnb.net>
To: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com>
Cc: Bart Van Assche <bart.vanassche@gmail.com>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, scst-devel@lists.sourceforge.net,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2.6.25.1] Add scsi_execute_async_fifo()
Date: Fri, 02 May 2008 22:09:51 +0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <481B58EF.2030707@vlnb.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1209745084.3121.39.camel@localhost.localdomain>
James Bottomley wrote:
> On Fri, 2008-05-02 at 18:06 +0200, Bart Van Assche wrote:
>> On Fri, May 2, 2008 at 5:55 PM, Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org> wrote:
>>> On Fri, May 02, 2008 at 05:53:22PM +0200, Bart Van Assche wrote:
>>>> Regarding out-of-tree modules: this is just a preparatory step before
>>>> submitting SCST for inclusion in the mainstream kernel.
>>> And what crackpipe did you smoke to thing we'd put duplicated target
>>> framework in?
>> Why are you so aggressive ? I didn't insult you in any way.
>>
>> Regarding inclusion of SCSI target code in the mainline, this subject
>> has already been discussed extensively in the past
>> (http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/1/23/134). The conclusion was clear: SCST
>> is faster than any other existing iSCSI target for Linux (IET, STGT,
>> LIO), stable, well maintained and the most standards compliant target.
>> Why do you want to reopen this discussion ?
>
> That's an interesting rewrite of history. The evidence you presented
> showed fairly identical results apart from on one contrived IB benchmark
> that couldn't directly compare the two.
>
> I'm also on record in the thread saying that was insufficient proof for
> me to justify throwing STGT out and replacing it with SCST.
James, why do you keep ignoring important points, written by me in that
e-mail: http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/1/30/178?
Namely:
1. Solid architecture of SCST is inherently more simple than distributed
user/kernel space processing, when kernel behaves under control of user
space, used in STGT, and allows to get better results with less effort.
Better in all aspects: simplicity (hence, maintainability), reliability
and performance. Linux once made step away from microkernel based design
and that was for really good reasons.
2. Zero-copy operations with page cache will halve processing latency on
high speed links, like InfiniBand, and it is impossible to implement
that in a sane way with STGT approach, while for SCST it can be
implemented simply and naturally.
Vlad
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-05-02 18:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 36+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-05-02 14:38 [PATCH 2.6.25.1] Add scsi_execute_async_fifo() Bart Van Assche
2008-05-02 15:33 ` Christoph Hellwig
2008-05-02 15:53 ` Bart Van Assche
2008-05-02 15:55 ` Christoph Hellwig
2008-05-02 16:06 ` Bart Van Assche
2008-05-02 16:16 ` Matthew Wilcox
2008-05-02 16:23 ` Bart Van Assche
2008-05-02 16:30 ` James Bottomley
2008-05-02 16:43 ` Bart Van Assche
2008-05-02 16:49 ` Matthew Wilcox
2008-05-02 16:57 ` Bart Van Assche
2008-05-02 17:02 ` Matthew Wilcox
2008-05-02 18:21 ` Vladislav Bolkhovitin
2008-05-02 16:18 ` James Bottomley
2008-05-02 16:39 ` Bart Van Assche
2008-05-02 18:09 ` Vladislav Bolkhovitin [this message]
2008-05-02 18:17 ` SCSI target subsystem Vladislav Bolkhovitin
2008-05-03 9:41 ` Bart Van Assche
2008-05-03 9:53 ` Matthew Wilcox
2008-05-03 10:39 ` Bart Van Assche
2008-05-03 13:28 ` Matthew Wilcox
2008-05-03 14:48 ` Bart Van Assche
2008-05-04 15:53 ` Bart Van Assche
2008-05-04 11:35 ` Vladislav Bolkhovitin
2008-05-04 15:23 ` Vladislav Bolkhovitin
2008-05-04 11:48 ` [PATCH 2.6.25.1] Add scsi_execute_async_fifo() Vladislav Bolkhovitin
2008-05-04 17:53 ` Boaz Harrosh
2008-05-13 16:48 ` Vladislav Bolkhovitin
2008-05-13 17:35 ` Boaz Harrosh
2008-05-14 15:58 ` [Scst-devel] " Vladislav Bolkhovitin
2008-05-14 16:38 ` Boaz Harrosh
2008-05-14 16:49 ` Vladislav Bolkhovitin
2008-05-04 15:30 ` Bart Van Assche
2008-05-08 15:02 ` Bart Van Assche
2008-05-08 15:54 ` [Scst-devel] " Arne Redlich
2008-05-13 16:47 ` Vladislav Bolkhovitin
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=481B58EF.2030707@vlnb.net \
--to=vst@vlnb.net \
--cc=James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com \
--cc=bart.vanassche@gmail.com \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=scst-devel@lists.sourceforge.net \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).