On 11/08/2012 07:22 PM, Mike Christie wrote:
> On 11/08/2012 05:32 PM, Andy Grover wrote:
>> The Red Hat packaging of open-iscsi (iscsi-initiator-utils) has
>> contained C and Python libraries for open-iscsi since 2009. These have
>> been used only by the Anaconda installer, and haven't been pushed upstream.

> Have you reviewed the lib yourself and what do you think it needs? Not
> putting you on the spot. Just want to know where we are starting from. I
> just briefly looked at the code and was not sure what has changed since
> I last worked on it.

Hi Mike,

I familiarized myself with the code a little, but before diving in was
hoping to get guidance from you, which you've certainly provided.

> My issue was that it was nice for what we used it for in RHEL/fedora,
> but it needs some updating. It is based on a confusing open-iscsi'ism
> where the node is actually a portal. And actually it represents more. It
> is more like a set of objects (target, portal, initiator/initiator-port)
> to create N sessions with.

> We should define a lib that is more based on the iscsi RFC and how it
> is implemented in linux and the iscsi ima lib (at least make it so
> vendors using IMA can use our lib so they do not have to call
> iscsiadm or modify iscsiadm in weird ways). Fix the definition of a
> node/target, portal, etc so it is not defined as a result of the
> crustiness of the tools and how they grew over time.

OK how is this object tree in representing what we want?

a system has 1+ Nodes (iqns)
Nodes have 1+ Portals (IP addresses)
Portals have 1+ Sessions

?

> I would like the iscsi tools to be able to use the iscsi lib's exported
> API. Almost everything iscsiadm wants to do, other tools wants to do
> too. I am not sure if this a hard requirement though. However, the
> current way that the tools and lib are built is not nice. It is too
> fragile to changes in the code that is shared.

I agree that would be ideal eventually. I would think we can work on
libiscsiadm and then switch the tools to use the lib after that.

> I think you also need to update the libiscsi_network_config struct or
[SNIP specific things needing fixing]

OK will take a look at fixing.

> When I was working on the lib I wanted to rewrite the tools. They have
> got really crusty due to trying to maintain compat (the sysfs and idbm
> code are crazy). They were also written when we did not know how all
> iscsi hw would work and we were basically wrong at every point :)

The on-disk format for idbm looks ok, I'm sure it won't be that bad :)

> I think maybe starting by specifying the objects we want to manage and
> get info about and what we want to do with those objects would be best???

Yes, please see above.

Anyways, I think this is going to be a sustained effort. Do you have an
idea of what criteria you'd like a mergable first version to meet?

Thanks -- Regards -- Andy

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"open-iscsi" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/open-iscsi?hl=en.

Reply via email to