From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1753810Ab0IGG1F (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Tue, 7 Sep 2010 02:27:05 -0400
Received: from mail-pw0-f46.google.com ([209.85.160.46]:39510 "EHLO
	mail-pw0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1750772Ab0IGG06 (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Tue, 7 Sep 2010 02:26:58 -0400
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version
         :content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent;
        b=tyZO6Em4zcBOs4gtBAebXbhtlU7rk5PprR3+5TgMn40PGFydLnbFZv7WeuKs0U4HZP
         KW46EHi476bzsaBaJbgHY64VPozP4/bGPfJBB24xDkuStKWpvCinjE7QffgcI7u8qQp/
         aDJBl1QrhmLhoE9GzzUGDmR4Qi1KQB5bG/8kg=
Date: Mon, 6 Sep 2010 23:26:52 -0700
From: Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com>
To: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>
Cc: "Nicholas A. Bellinger" <nab@linux-iscsi.org>,
        Vladislav Bolkhovitin <vst@vlnb.net>,
        James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@suse.de>,
        Dirk Meister <dmeister@uni-paderborn.de>, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org,
        Chetan Loke <chetanloke@gmail.com>,
        Chetan Loke <generationgnu@yahoo.com>,
        scst-devel <scst-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Mike Christie <michaelc@cs.wisc.edu>,
        FUJITA Tomonori <fujita.tomonori@lab.ntt.co.jp>
Subject: Re: [Scst-devel] Fwd: Re: linuxcon 2010...
Message-ID: <20100907062652.GA1680@core.coreip.homeip.net>
References: <1283459158.5598.143.camel@haakon2.linux-iscsi.org>
 <20100905201802.GC18411@core.coreip.homeip.net>
 <1283723447.556.133.camel@haakon2.linux-iscsi.org>
 <20100905234134.GA17212@core.coreip.homeip.net>
 <1283731194.556.147.camel@haakon2.linux-iscsi.org>
 <1283769578.15944.1293.camel@mulgrave.site>
 <4C85617E.2080603@vlnb.net>
 <1283810135.556.238.camel@haakon2.linux-iscsi.org>
 <20100907004424.GB21430@core.coreip.homeip.net>
 <AANLkTin9Hk8+oMdXfB4h_DhirRyPf00739g5BpKcUE_5@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTin9Hk8+oMdXfB4h_DhirRyPf00739g5BpKcUE_5@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-12-10)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Tue, Sep 07, 2010 at 08:08:37AM +0200, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 2:44 AM, Dmitry Torokhov
> <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > [ ... ]
> >
> > Vlad appears to be asserting that SCST is more feature-complete that LIO
> > at this point. It also seems that LIO is somewhat younger than SCST. So
> > at this point it might be interesting to see:
> >
> > 1. What are the shortcomings of SCST design compared to LIO and why LIO
> > developers chose to come with their own solution instead of
> > collaborating with SCST folks?
> >
> > 2. What features are missing from SCST that are currently available in
> > LIO?
> >
> > Once this is sorted out and [most] everyone agrees that LIO is indeed
> > technically superior (even if maybe not as mature yet) solution, then it
> > would make sense to request SCST developers to go to file/line depth of
> > the review.
> 
> You seem to have missed the start of this thread. The design of SCST
> is significantly more advanced than that of LIO, and it has already
> been explained in this thread why
> (http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-scsi/msg45856.html).
> 

The question was directed to LIO folks as they appear to disagree with
this statement.

-- 
Dmitry