[stgt] TaskManagement support in libiscsi
fujita.tomonori at lab.ntt.co.jp
Sun Feb 27 06:19:16 CET 2011
On Fri, 25 Feb 2011 14:36:00 +1100
ronnie sahlberg <ronniesahlberg at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 11:00 AM, FUJITA Tomonori
> <fujita.tomonori at lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote:
> > On Sat, 19 Feb 2011 18:29:36 +1100
> > ronnie sahlberg <ronniesahlberg at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> Libiscsi now has support to generate task management functions.
> >> This can be used in to easily and reliably generate task management
> >> functions and send these to a target to test that
> >> the tm operations work.
> >> For example in 'make test' or in special tools written for regression testing.
> >> As there has been a few tm related issues in stgt, and that is often
> >> 'difficult' to manually generate such functions from userspace,
> >> I think that this support in libiscsi will be useful.
> > Nice, I should test tgt with it.
> Would it be useful to add some "make test" framework which could run a
> number of small tests with tgtd and dedicated applications built on
> libiscsi and similar ?
> Things like
> 1) Write a singe huge WRITE10 to the target containing random data and
> then read it back with READ10 and compare the result?
> 2) Send a huge number of WRITE10 to the target, then immediately send
> ABORT TASK for all of them and make sure tgtd does not segv ?
> 3) Take out a reserve, then from a different session try to do I/O and
> verify the reserve works ?
> Something like that, a set of many small test applications and tests
> that are run one by one to verify one task at a time.
Surely, such could be very useful.
I suspect it's difficult to test TMF (abort, etc) since in most cases,
the target is fast enough.
> I can start building an initial framework and a couple of small tests
> if you want to.
> It would mean that in order to do 'make test' on STGT you would have a
> dependency that you would need libiscsi so that you can build the test
I don't think that adding libiscsi dependency to tgt is a good idea
(at least, until libiscsi is shipped in most of Linux distributions).
I think that we have such framework as a separate project. The
framework can be useful for other iSCSI target implementations too.
> (This could also allow 'fuzz'-testing. Which is often very useful for
> testing boundary cases that are 'difficult/impossible' to generate
> using a real bug-free client. Fuzz testing could be 'do all these I/O
> over and over but add random modification to iscsi and scsi headers,
> sending deliberately 'bad' commands to the server over and over to see
> if you eventually get a segv or similar)
I think that this is a useful feature too.
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