[stgt] [PATCH] changes in iscsi login/text prototypes, structs
fujita.tomonori at lab.ntt.co.jp
Fri Sep 24 12:41:37 CEST 2010
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
More information about the stgt