[Stgt-devel] [Scst-devel] Integration of SCST in the mainstream Linux kernel

[Tomasz Chmielewski]

FUJITA Tomonori schrieb:
> From: Tomasz Chmielewski <mangoo at wpkg.org>
> Subject: Re: [Stgt-devel] [Scst-devel] Integration of SCST in the mainstream Linux kernel
> Date: Sun, 09 Mar 2008 19:35:52 +0100
> 
>> FUJITA Tomonori schrieb:
>>> On Tue, 05 Feb 2008 18:04:52 +0100
>>> Tomasz Chmielewski <mangoo at nospam.wpkg.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> FUJITA Tomonori schrieb:
>>>>
>>>> (...)
>>>>
>>>>>> The problem with tgtd is that you can't start it (configured) in an
>>>>>> "atomic" way.
>>>>>> Usually, one will start tgtd and it's configuration in a script (I 
>>>>>> replaced some parameters with "..." to make it shorter and more readable):
>>>>> Thanks for the details. So the way to stop the daemon is not related
>>>>> with your problem.
>>>>>
>>>>> It's easily fixable. Can you start a new thread about this on
>>>>> stgt-devel mailing list? When we agree on the interface to start the
>>>>> daemon, I'll implement it.
>>>> Sure.
>>>>
>>>> 1. tgtd should not immediately background, but only when it's fully started?
>>>>
>>>> 2. tgtd should only start to listen if told so? tgtdadm --listen/--nolisten?
>>> I was thinking about something like:
>>>
>>> tgtadm --op update --mode sys --name state -v running
>> Hi,
>>
>> Have there been any changes in this area (I remember some discussion 
>> here, but I can't find any posts)?
>>
>> Or is it still recommended to use iptables before/after starting tgtd?
> 
> Hmm, this doesn't work for your?
> 
> https://lists.berlios.de/pipermail/stgt-devel/2008-February/001380.html

Oh yes. That was the post I was looking for.

But it looks that there is still this issue then - so it may fail sometimes:

  there is a race
  between the first and second operations (that is, you need to peform
  the second right after the first, before the initiator tries to
  connect). I'm fine with changing the default state to 'offline'.

?


-- 
Tomasz Chmielewski
http://wpkg.org