Re: [PATCH 00/24] InfiniBand Transport (IBTRS) and Network Block Device (IBNBD)

Hi Doug, thanks for the feedback. You read the cover letter correctly: our transport library implements multipath (load balancing and failover) on top of RDMA API. Its name "IBTRS" is slightly misleading in that regard: it can sit on top of ROCE as well. The library allows for "bundling" multiple

Re: [PATCH 00/24] InfiniBand Transport (IBTRS) and Network Block Device (IBNBD)

On Thu, 2018-02-08 at 18:38 +0100, Danil Kipnis wrote: > thanks for the link to the article. To the best of my understanding, > the guys suggest to authenticate the devices first and only then > authenticate the users who use the devices in order to get access to a > corporate service. They also

Re: [PATCH 00/24] InfiniBand Transport (IBTRS) and Network Block Device (IBNBD)

On Wed, Feb 7, 2018 at 6:32 PM, Bart Van Assche wrote: > On Wed, 2018-02-07 at 18:18 +0100, Roman Penyaev wrote: >> So the question is: are there real life setups where >> some of the local IB network members can be untrusted? > > Hello Roman, > > You may want to read more

Re: [PATCH 00/24] InfiniBand Transport (IBTRS) and Network Block Device (IBNBD)

On Wed, 2018-02-07 at 18:18 +0100, Roman Penyaev wrote: > So the question is: are there real life setups where > some of the local IB network members can be untrusted? Hello Roman, You may want to read more about the latest evolutions with regard to network security. An article that I can

Re: [PATCH 00/24] InfiniBand Transport (IBTRS) and Network Block Device (IBNBD)

On Wed, Feb 7, 2018 at 5:35 PM, Christopher Lameter wrote: > On Mon, 5 Feb 2018, Bart Van Assche wrote: > >> That approach may work well for your employer but sorry I don't think this is >> sufficient for an upstream driver. I think that most users who configure a >> network

Re: [PATCH 00/24] InfiniBand Transport (IBTRS) and Network Block Device (IBNBD)

On Mon, 5 Feb 2018, Bart Van Assche wrote: > That approach may work well for your employer but sorry I don't think this is > sufficient for an upstream driver. I think that most users who configure a > network storage target expect full control over which storage devices are > exported > and

Re: [PATCH 00/24] InfiniBand Transport (IBTRS) and Network Block Device (IBNBD)

On Wed, 2018-02-07 at 13:57 +0100, Roman Penyaev wrote: > On Tue, Feb 6, 2018 at 5:01 PM, Bart Van Assche > wrote: > > On Tue, 2018-02-06 at 14:12 +0100, Roman Penyaev wrote: > > Something else I would like to understand better is how much of the latency > > gap between

Re: [PATCH 00/24] InfiniBand Transport (IBTRS) and Network Block Device (IBNBD)

Hi Sagi and all, On Mon, Feb 5, 2018 at 1:30 PM, Sagi Grimberg wrote: > Hi Roman and the team (again), replying to my own email :) > > I forgot to mention that first of all thank you for upstreaming > your work! I fully support your goal to have your production driver >

Re: [PATCH 00/24] InfiniBand Transport (IBTRS) and Network Block Device (IBNBD)

On Tue, Feb 6, 2018 at 5:01 PM, Bart Van Assche wrote: > On Tue, 2018-02-06 at 14:12 +0100, Roman Penyaev wrote: >> On Mon, Feb 5, 2018 at 1:16 PM, Sagi Grimberg wrote: >> > [ ... ] >> > - srp/scst comparison is really not fair having it in legacy

Re: [PATCH 00/24] InfiniBand Transport (IBTRS) and Network Block Device (IBNBD)

On Tue, 2018-02-06 at 14:12 +0100, Roman Penyaev wrote: > On Mon, Feb 5, 2018 at 1:16 PM, Sagi Grimberg wrote: > > [ ... ] > > - srp/scst comparison is really not fair having it in legacy request > > mode. Can you please repeat it and report a bug to either linux-rdma > > or

Re: [PATCH 00/24] InfiniBand Transport (IBTRS) and Network Block Device (IBNBD)

On Tue, 2018-02-06 at 10:44 +0100, Danil Kipnis wrote: > the configuration (which devices can be accessed by a particular > client) can happen also after the kernel target module is loaded. The > directory in is a module parameter and is fixed. It > contains for example "/ibnbd_devices/". But a

Re: [PATCH 00/24] InfiniBand Transport (IBTRS) and Network Block Device (IBNBD)

Hi Sagi, On Mon, Feb 5, 2018 at 1:16 PM, Sagi Grimberg wrote: > Hi Roman and the team, > > On 02/02/2018 04:08 PM, Roman Pen wrote: >> >> This series introduces IBNBD/IBTRS modules. >> >> IBTRS (InfiniBand Transport) is a reliable high speed transport library >> which allows

Re: [PATCH 00/24] InfiniBand Transport (IBTRS) and Network Block Device (IBNBD)

On Mon, Feb 5, 2018 at 6:20 PM, Bart Van Assche wrote: > On Mon, 2018-02-05 at 18:16 +0100, Roman Penyaev wrote: >> Everything (fio jobs, setup, etc) is given in the same link: >> >> https://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-rdma/msg48799.html >> >> at the bottom you will find

Re: [PATCH 00/24] InfiniBand Transport (IBTRS) and Network Block Device (IBNBD)

On Mon, Feb 5, 2018 at 7:38 PM, Bart Van Assche wrote: > On 02/05/18 08:40, Danil Kipnis wrote: >> >> It just occurred to me, that we could easily extend the interface in >> such a way that each client (i.e. each session) would have on server >> side her own directory with

Re: [PATCH 00/24] InfiniBand Transport (IBTRS) and Network Block Device (IBNBD)

On 02/05/18 08:40, Danil Kipnis wrote: It just occurred to me, that we could easily extend the interface in such a way that each client (i.e. each session) would have on server side her own directory with the devices it can access. I.e. instead of just "dev_search_path" per server, any client

Re: [PATCH 00/24] InfiniBand Transport (IBTRS) and Network Block Device (IBNBD)

On Mon, 2018-02-05 at 18:16 +0100, Roman Penyaev wrote: > Everything (fio jobs, setup, etc) is given in the same link: > > https://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-rdma/msg48799.html > > at the bottom you will find links on google docs with many pages > and archived fio jobs and scripts. (I do not

Re: [PATCH 00/24] InfiniBand Transport (IBTRS) and Network Block Device (IBNBD)

Hi Bart, On Mon, Feb 5, 2018 at 5:58 PM, Bart Van Assche wrote: > On Mon, 2018-02-05 at 14:16 +0200, Sagi Grimberg wrote: >> - Your latency measurements are surprisingly high for a null target >>device (even for low end nvme device actually) regardless of the >>

Re: [PATCH 00/24] InfiniBand Transport (IBTRS) and Network Block Device (IBNBD)

On Mon, 2018-02-05 at 14:16 +0200, Sagi Grimberg wrote: > - Your latency measurements are surprisingly high for a null target >device (even for low end nvme device actually) regardless of the >transport implementation. > > For example: > - QD=1 read latency is 648.95 for ibnbd (I assume

Re: [PATCH 00/24] InfiniBand Transport (IBTRS) and Network Block Device (IBNBD)

On Mon, Feb 5, 2018 at 3:17 PM, Sagi Grimberg wrote: > Hi Bart, My another 2 cents:) On Fri, Feb 2, 2018 at 6:05 PM, Bart Van Assche wrote: > > > On Fri, 2018-02-02 at 15:08 +0100, Roman Pen wrote: >> >>

Re: [PATCH 00/24] InfiniBand Transport (IBTRS) and Network Block Device (IBNBD)

On Mon, Feb 5, 2018 at 5:16 PM, Bart Van Assche wrote: > On Mon, 2018-02-05 at 09:56 +0100, Jinpu Wang wrote: >> Hi Bart, >> >> My another 2 cents:) >> On Fri, Feb 2, 2018 at 6:05 PM, Bart Van Assche >> wrote: >> > On Fri, 2018-02-02 at 15:08

Re: [PATCH 00/24] InfiniBand Transport (IBTRS) and Network Block Device (IBNBD)

On Mon, 2018-02-05 at 09:56 +0100, Jinpu Wang wrote: > Hi Bart, > > My another 2 cents:) > On Fri, Feb 2, 2018 at 6:05 PM, Bart Van Assche > wrote: > > On Fri, 2018-02-02 at 15:08 +0100, Roman Pen wrote: > > > o Simple configuration of IBNBD: > > >- Server side is

Re: [PATCH 00/24] InfiniBand Transport (IBTRS) and Network Block Device (IBNBD)

Hi Bart, My another 2 cents:) On Fri, Feb 2, 2018 at 6:05 PM, Bart Van Assche wrote: On Fri, 2018-02-02 at 15:08 +0100, Roman Pen wrote: o Simple configuration of IBNBD: - Server side is completely passive: volumes do not need to be explicitly exported.

Re: [PATCH 00/24] InfiniBand Transport (IBTRS) and Network Block Device (IBNBD)

> >> Hi Bart, >> >> My another 2 cents:) >> On Fri, Feb 2, 2018 at 6:05 PM, Bart Van Assche >> wrote: >>> >>> On Fri, 2018-02-02 at 15:08 +0100, Roman Pen wrote: o Simple configuration of IBNBD: - Server side is completely passive: volumes do not need to

Re: [PATCH 00/24] InfiniBand Transport (IBTRS) and Network Block Device (IBNBD)

Hi Roman and the team (again), replying to my own email :) I forgot to mention that first of all thank you for upstreaming your work! I fully support your goal to have your production driver upstream to minimize your maintenance efforts. I hope that my feedback didn't came across with a

Re: [PATCH 00/24] InfiniBand Transport (IBTRS) and Network Block Device (IBNBD)

Hi Roman and the team, On 02/02/2018 04:08 PM, Roman Pen wrote: This series introduces IBNBD/IBTRS modules. IBTRS (InfiniBand Transport) is a reliable high speed transport library which allows for establishing connection between client and server machines via RDMA. So its not strictly

Re: [PATCH 00/24] InfiniBand Transport (IBTRS) and Network Block Device (IBNBD)

Hi Bart, My another 2 cents:) On Fri, Feb 2, 2018 at 6:05 PM, Bart Van Assche wrote: On Fri, 2018-02-02 at 15:08 +0100, Roman Pen wrote: o Simple configuration of IBNBD: - Server side is completely passive: volumes do not need to be explicitly exported.

Re: [PATCH 00/24] InfiniBand Transport (IBTRS) and Network Block Device (IBNBD)

Hi Bart, My another 2 cents:) On Fri, Feb 2, 2018 at 6:05 PM, Bart Van Assche wrote: > On Fri, 2018-02-02 at 15:08 +0100, Roman Pen wrote: >> o Simple configuration of IBNBD: >>- Server side is completely passive: volumes do not need to be >> explicitly exported.

Re: [PATCH 00/24] InfiniBand Transport (IBTRS) and Network Block Device (IBNBD)

On Fri, Feb 2, 2018 at 5:40 PM, Doug Ledford wrote: > On Fri, 2018-02-02 at 16:07 +, Bart Van Assche wrote: >> On Fri, 2018-02-02 at 15:08 +0100, Roman Pen wrote: >> > Since the first version the following was changed: >> > >> >- Load-balancing and IO fail-over using

Re: [PATCH 00/24] InfiniBand Transport (IBTRS) and Network Block Device (IBNBD)

On Fri, 2018-02-02 at 15:08 +0100, Roman Pen wrote: > o Simple configuration of IBNBD: >- Server side is completely passive: volumes do not need to be > explicitly exported. That sounds like a security hole? I think the ability to configure whether or not an initiator is allowed to log

Re: [PATCH 00/24] InfiniBand Transport (IBTRS) and Network Block Device (IBNBD)

On Fri, 2018-02-02 at 16:07 +, Bart Van Assche wrote: > On Fri, 2018-02-02 at 15:08 +0100, Roman Pen wrote: > > Since the first version the following was changed: > > > >- Load-balancing and IO fail-over using multipath features were added. > >- Major parts of the code were rewritten,

Re: [PATCH 00/24] InfiniBand Transport (IBTRS) and Network Block Device (IBNBD)

On Fri, 2018-02-02 at 15:08 +0100, Roman Pen wrote: > Since the first version the following was changed: > >- Load-balancing and IO fail-over using multipath features were added. >- Major parts of the code were rewritten, simplified and overall code > size was reduced by a quarter.