Re: Multi-Actuator SAS HDD First Look

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Fri, Apr 6, 2018 at 11:09 AM, Douglas Gilbert <dgilbert@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On 2018-04-06 02:42 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Apr 06, 2018 at 08:24:18AM +0200, Hannes Reinecke wrote:
>>>
>>> Ah. Far better.
>>> What about delegating FORMAT UNIT to the control LUN, and not
>>> implementing it for the individual disk LUNs?
>>> That would make an even stronger case for having a control LUN;
>>> with that there wouldn't be any problem with having to synchronize
>>> across LUNs etc.
>>
>>
>> It sounds to me like NVMe might be a much better model for this drive
>> than SCSI, btw :)
>
>
> So you found a document that outlines NVMe's architecture! Could you
> share the url (no marketing BS, please)?
>
>
> And a serious question ... How would you map NVMe's (in Linux)
> subsystem number, controller device minor number, CNTLID field
> (Identify ctl response) and namespace id onto the SCSI subsystem's
> h:c:t:l ?
>
> Doug Gilbert
>

Hannes- yes, a drive system altering operation like FORMAT UNIT is
asking for a dedicated management port, as the NVMe folks apparently
felt. But what is the least painful endpoint type for LUN0?


-- 
Tim Walker
Product Design Systems Engineering, Seagate Technology
(303) 775-3770



[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [SCSI Target Devel]     [Linux SCSI Target Infrastructure]     [Kernel Newbies]     [IDE]     [Security]     [Git]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux ATA RAID]     [Linux IIO]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]

  Powered by Linux