linux-scsi.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
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


  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).