On Wed, 22 Sep 2010 15:28:28 +0200 Alexander Nezhinsky <alexandern at Voltaire.COM> wrote: > On 09/22/2010 02:08 PM, FUJITA Tomonori wrote: > > On Wed, 22 Sep 2010 21:05:01 +0900 > > FUJITA Tomonori <fujita.tomonori at lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote: > > > >> On Tue, 21 Sep 2010 14:33:31 +0200 > >> Alexander Nezhinsky <alexandern at Voltaire.COM> wrote: > >> > >> This patch breaks the dependence of iscsi login/text code on the > >> static structures within struct iscsi_conn. > > > Can you start with the simpler approach like this? > > > > http://lists.wpkg.org/pipermail/stgt/2010-July/003970.html > > It's been a long time since i promised a patch with the login stuff. > This proved to be more difficult than i envisioned. > The login code is quite messy, and i failed in changing it to > receive only char * buffers and sizes. > So the simple approach did not work. Understood. The approach really works? > Note, that the patch that i sent does not break anything. How it's guaranteed? > > As I said before, duplicating the code is fine by now. If the new code > > really fixes the iser bugs, better to merge the code quickly. As long > > as there is no risk to break the tcp iscsi code, the patchset can be > > merged. > iser code (that you've got) fixes the bug, but all the objections and > reservations, that you have raised previously (about the big patch etc.) > are still valid. So i am a bit surprised that your highest priority > was the merge. Well, the iser code has been buggy for too long. > > And please add bidi support to your new code. No feature regression > > compared with the current code, please. > I can work on it, sure. Again, it has not been my perception that this > was the only blocker. > > I believe that i have a rough idea now, about how to proceed in a series > of relatively small controlled patches and get the things right, > with a cleaner design and minimal code duplication. > > If you prefer to merge new iser "as is", as quickly as possible, > I'm all in for it, of course. I can fix bidi, as I said. > > But as a minimum, i'd prefer avoiding login/text code duplication. > I'm less bothered by other duplicated stuff, like connections, iscsi logic etc. > Two reasons. First, it will shrink the patch. > Second, now after working out the login code, i see that its iser-duplicated > version has some holes (not that i'm happy with the original one, but this > is another story). Thus i think the patch i have sent is worth taking. > > If you are afraid of breaking iscsi/tcp by applying the patch directly > to "master", perhaps another approach will work. You can start a new branch, > from the "master", apply the last patch there, and i'll start sending patches > destined for the new branch. > I'll resend the new iser code, w/out duplicated login, then add a patch > for bidi support and a few other small fixes i've made recently to iser. Distributions will not ship a new branch. When the new iser code (with bidi support) is ready, I'll merge it at a time. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe stgt" in the body of a message to majordomo at vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html |