On Thu, 2008-08-21 at 18:31 -0500, Mike Christie wrote: > I think James also said something about moving STGT in-kernel to get > performance gains, but I do not think it means that we have to push > exact code that sits in Tomo's git tree from usrspace into the kernel. > If along the way we replace it with scst or Nick's code and we end up > with a variant of scst or Nicks code that can still support userspace > targets then I do not think any one is going to make long threads like > these have resulted in :) I meant actually allowing performance critical pieces to work either in-user or in-kernel. How, I'm not sure ... if we could use the same code for both, that would be brilliant ... if we have to have separate pieces, that will be OK. The error injection and transport debug people think it's important to have the state machine in user space for fast prototyping and debugging, so I'm not going to take this away from them. > Will this work for everyone? Sounds like a plan. (However, it also sounds suspiciously like the last plan we had from the storage summit which didn't actually attract any implementers ...) James -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
