Re: TCMU: pass through initiator name to user space, three proposals, which is better

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

 



On Mon, 2017-06-12 at 01:06 +0800, Zhu Lingshan wrote:
> I am working on PR support for RBD in user space, aka, give tcmu-runner 
> rbd handler ability to handle Persistent Reservation operations. Now RBD 
> handler side works fine, I can capture the CDBs, analyze it, store/ read 
> keys, also other supportive codes done and works fine.

Hello Zhu,

Since handling PR in user space would add significant complexity (due to the
new interfaces between kernel and user space that are required) and also has
significant disadvantages (Mike Christie mentioned the overhead due to the
reservation state check), can you explain why you think it would be useful to
handle PR commands in user space instead of keeping all PR command processing
in the kernel?

If you are looking at this to support synchronizing the PR state across
multiple nodes in a cluster I think handling PR in user space is wrong because
that means the solution to synchronize the PR state across nodes will be
limited to RBD and won't work for clusters that don't use RBD.

Are you aware that reliable open source code exists for synchronizing the PR
state across multiple cluster nodes? See also
https://www.linuxplumbersconf.org/2015/ocw/system/presentations/2691/original/Using%20the%20DLM%20as%20a%20Distributed%20In-Memory%20Database.pdf

Bart.--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe target-devel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html




[Index of Archives]     [Linux SCSI]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Linux SCSI Target Infrastructure]     [Share Photos]     [IDE]     [Security]     [Git]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux ATA RAID]     [Linux IIO]     [Device Mapper]

  Powered by Linux