From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
To: "Nicholas A. Bellinger" <nab@linux-iscsi.org>
Cc: Sagi Grimberg <sagi@lightbits.io>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
axboe@kernel.dk, linux-block@vger.kernel.org,
linux-scsi <linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org,
keith.busch@intel.com,
target-devel <target-devel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: NVMe over Fabrics target implementation
Date: Thu, 9 Jun 2016 15:46:03 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160609134603.GA29820@lst.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1465446975.5365.123.camel@haakon3.risingtidesystems.com>
On Wed, Jun 08, 2016 at 09:36:15PM -0700, Nicholas A. Bellinger wrote:
> The configfs ABI should not dictate a single backend use-case.
And it doesn't. I actually had a file backend implemented to
benchmark it against the loopback driver. It needed absolutely
zero new configfs interface. And if we at some point want
different backends using different attributes we can trivially
add them using configfs_register_group.
> Along with having common code and existing configfs
> ABI, we also get a proper starting point for target-core
> features that span across endpoints, and are defined for
> both scsi and nvme. PR APTPL immediately comes to mind.
PRs are a useful feature on the road map. However we need a separate
pluggable backend anyway for distributed backends like RBD or Bart's
DLM implementation. Also the current LIO PR implementation will need
a lot of work to be usable for NVMe while actually following the
spec in all it's details and to be power ѕafe. The right way to
go here is a PR API that allows different backends, and the existing
LIO one might be one of them after it's got the needed attention.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-06-09 13:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-06-06 21:22 NVMe over Fabrics target implementation Christoph Hellwig
2016-06-06 21:22 ` [PATCH 1/3] block: Export blk_poll Christoph Hellwig
2016-06-07 6:49 ` Nicholas A. Bellinger
2016-06-06 21:22 ` [PATCH 2/3] nvmet: add a generic NVMe target Christoph Hellwig
2016-06-06 21:22 ` [PATCH 3/3] nvme-loop: add a NVMe loopback host driver Christoph Hellwig
2016-06-06 22:00 ` kbuild test robot
2016-06-07 6:23 ` NVMe over Fabrics target implementation Nicholas A. Bellinger
2016-06-07 10:55 ` Christoph Hellwig
2016-06-08 5:21 ` Nicholas A. Bellinger
2016-06-08 12:19 ` Christoph Hellwig
2016-06-08 13:12 ` Sagi Grimberg
2016-06-08 13:46 ` Christoph Hellwig
2016-06-09 4:36 ` Nicholas A. Bellinger
2016-06-09 13:46 ` Christoph Hellwig [this message]
2016-06-09 3:32 ` Nicholas A. Bellinger
2016-06-07 21:02 ` Andy Grover
2016-06-07 21:10 ` Ming Lin
2016-06-07 17:01 ` Bart Van Assche
2016-06-07 17:31 ` Christoph Hellwig
2016-06-07 18:11 ` Bart Van Assche
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20160609134603.GA29820@lst.de \
--to=hch@lst.de \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=keith.busch@intel.com \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nab@linux-iscsi.org \
--cc=sagi@lightbits.io \
--cc=target-devel@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).