Thank you Mike for this update.
I sent you and Dave the relevant changes we found for hyper-v.

Cheers /maged

From: "Mike Christie" <>
Sent: Monday, October 17, 2016 9:40 PM
To: "Maged Mokhtar" <>; "Lars Marowsky-Bree" <>; <>; "Paul Cuzner" <>
Subject: Re: [ceph-users] new Open Source Ceph based iSCSI SAN project

If it is just a couple kernel changes you should post them, so SUSE can
merge them in target_core_rbd and we can port them to upstream. You will
not have to carry them and SUSE and I will not have to re-debug the
problems :)

For the (non target_mode approach), everything that is needed for basic
IO, failover and failback (we only support active/passive right now and
no distributed PRs like SUSE) support is merged upstream:

- Linus's tree
(git:// for
4.9 has the kernel changes.
- The Ceph tree ( has some rbd command line
tool changes that are needed.
- The multipath tools tree ( has changes
needed for how we are doing active/passive with the rbd exclusive lock.

So you can build patches against those trees.

For SUSE's approach, I think everything is in SUSE's git trees which you
probably are familiar with already.

Also, if you are going to build off of upstream/distros and/or also
support other distros as a base, Kraken will have these features, and so
will RHEL 7.3 and RHCS 2.1.

And for setup/management Paul Cuzner (
implemented ansible playbooks to set everything up:

Maybe you can use that too, but since you are SUSE based I am guessing
you are using lrbd.

On 10/17/2016 10:24 AM, Maged Mokhtar wrote:
Hi Lars,
Yes I was aware of David Disseldorp & Mike Christie efforts to upstream
the patches from a while back ago. I understand there will be a move
away from the SUSE target_mod_rbd to support a more generic device
handling but do not know what the current status of this work is. We
have made a couple of tweaks to target_mod_rbd to support some issues
with found with hyper-v which could be of use, we would be glad to help
in any way.
We will be moving to Jewel soon, but are still using Hammer simply
because we did not have time to test it well.
In our project we try to focus on HA clustered iSCSI only and make it
easy to setup and use. Drbd will not give a scale-out solution.
I will look into github, maybe it will help us in the future.

Cheers /maged

From: "Lars Marowsky-Bree" <>
Sent: Monday, October 17, 2016 4:21 PM
To: <>
Subject: Re: [ceph-users] new Open Source Ceph based iSCSI SAN project

On 2016-10-17T13:37:29, Maged Mokhtar <> wrote:

Hi Maged,

glad to see our patches caught your attention. You're aware that they
are being upstreamed by David Disseldorp and Mike Christie, right? You
don't have to uplift patches from our backported SLES kernel ;-)

Also, curious why you based this on Hammer; SUSE Enterprise Storage at
this point is based on Jewel. Did you experience any problems with the
older release? The newer one has important fixes.

Is this supposed to be a separate product/project forever? I mean, there
are several management frontends for Ceph at this stage gaining the
iSCSI functionality.

And, lastly, if all I wanted to build was an iSCSI target and not expose
the rest of Ceph's functionality, I'd probably build it around drbd9.

But glad to see the iSCSI frontend is gaining more traction. We have
many customers in the field deploying it successfully with our support

OK, not quite lastly - could you be convinced to make the source code
available in a bit more convenient form? I doubt that's the preferred
form of distribution for development ;-) A GitHub repo maybe?


SUSE Linux GmbH, GF: Felix Imend├Ârffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton,
HRB 21284 (AG N├╝rnberg)
"Experience is the name everyone gives to their mistakes." -- Oscar Wilde

ceph-users mailing list

ceph-users mailing list

ceph-users mailing list

Reply via email to