On Mon, 2014-09-22 at 14:00 -0700, Andy Grover wrote:
> On 09/22/2014 01:58 PM, Nicholas A. Bellinger wrote:
> > So I'd still like to start for an initial merge with the two different
> > modes mentioned earlier. The pure-passthrough mode where everything is
> > handled by user-space, and an I/O p
On 09/22/2014 01:58 PM, Nicholas A. Bellinger wrote:
So I'd still like to start for an initial merge with the two different
modes mentioned earlier. The pure-passthrough mode where everything is
handled by user-space, and an I/O passthrough mode where only
SCF_SCSI_DATA_CDB is passed along to us
On Fri, 2014-09-19 at 17:35 -0700, Andy Grover wrote:
> On 09/19/2014 04:51 PM, Alex Elsayed wrote:
>
> >> Not sure I follow.. How does the proposed passthrough mode prevent
> >> someone from emulating OSDs, media changers, optical disks or anything
> >> else in userspace with TCMU..?
> >>
> >> T
On Fri, 2014-09-19 at 16:51 -0700, Alex Elsayed wrote:
> Nicholas A. Bellinger wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 2014-09-19 at 14:43 -0700, Alex Elsayed wrote:
> >> Nicholas A. Bellinger wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> > So the idea of allowing the in-kernel CDB emulation to run after
> >> > user-space has returned un
On 09/19/2014 04:51 PM, Alex Elsayed wrote:
Not sure I follow.. How does the proposed passthrough mode prevent
someone from emulating OSDs, media changers, optical disks or anything
else in userspace with TCMU..?
The main thing that the above comments highlight is why attempting to
combine the
Nicholas A. Bellinger wrote:
> On Fri, 2014-09-19 at 14:43 -0700, Alex Elsayed wrote:
>> Nicholas A. Bellinger wrote:
>>
>>
>> > So the idea of allowing the in-kernel CDB emulation to run after
>> > user-space has returned unsupported opcode is problematic for a couple
>> > of different reasons.
On Fri, 2014-09-19 at 14:43 -0700, Alex Elsayed wrote:
> Nicholas A. Bellinger wrote:
>
>
> > So the idea of allowing the in-kernel CDB emulation to run after
> > user-space has returned unsupported opcode is problematic for a couple
> > of different reasons.
> >
> > First, if the correct featur
Hi Andy,
A few comments are inline below.
On Mon, 2014-09-15 at 16:12 -0700, Andy Grover wrote:
> Add a LIO storage engine that presents commands to userspace for execution.
> This would allow more complex backstores to be implemented out-of-kernel,
> and also make experimentation a-la FUSE (but
Add a LIO storage engine that presents commands to userspace for execution.
This would allow more complex backstores to be implemented out-of-kernel,
and also make experimentation a-la FUSE (but at the SCSI level -- "SUSE"?)
possible.
It uses a mmap()able UIO device per LUN to share a command ring
9 matches
Mail list logo
