[stgt] Why LUN0?

Arne Redlich arne.redlich at googlemail.com
Mon Dec 10 21:27:44 CET 2012

2012/12/10 Braun, David <David.Braun at drs.com>:
> Good catch but I don't think that's quite correct. To be accurate, the function list_first_entry(...) returns the first entry in the list or a pointer to the list head if empty.
> The return is LUN0 only because LUN0 is created automatically when the target is created.


> The function list_first_entry(...) is called at 10 places in all the source and only ONE place to find a device.

Sorry, I don't quite understand what you mean with that?

> So let me augment my patch and insert in target_cmd_queue(...) a test for this. I believe this will cause requests to a server with a LUN-less target to simply fail until a LUN gets defined - just like an absent target.

Here's a link to my patch submission 3 years ago:
http://lists.wpkg.org/pipermail/stgt/2009-June/003003.html . It
outlines a few more issues I had with the LUN 0. Here's a followup
with slightly more information on why it was not merged:

> BTW - this begs the question about when the sockets become available.

I guess you mean the iSCSI socket? Shouldn't really matter, as you can
block initiators from connecting as long as you're configuring your
target - which you'll have to do if you want to replace the dummy
device behind LUN 0 with a useful device.

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 mailing list