If memory serves me issuing a devfsadm -C should have removed the unmapped 
nodes, with two requirements.  One you didn't still have the LUNs mounted or in 
use on the host side.  And two the target actually removed the the LUNs from 
its SCSI report LUNs response.  

The code path that devfsadm -C should follow is something like the below...

iscsi_tran_bus_config()
 iscsid_config_all()
    iscsid_login_tgt()
      iscsi_sess_online()
        iscsi_sess_state_machine(N1)
          iscsi_sess_state_logged_in(N1)
            iscsi_sess_enumeration()
              iscsi_sess_reportluns()
                iscsi_lun_offline()

Its down in iscsi_sess_reportluns() where this gets interesting.  In this code 
it should identify the LUNs have been removed.  This code still without looking 
closely looks correct.  The identified luns are then offlined and I thought 
removed if not in use.  Although looking at the code now I don't see any 
attempt to remove the LUNs.  So maybe my memory is rusty.  There is an 
individual that knew this area of the code better than me.  I will see if I can 
still contact him as he also is not at Sun either any more.  Unfortunately, 
Sun's Network Storage source consolidation doesn't post there revision history 
like the core consolidation so its impossible for an outside to see if there 
was a regression.

The reason your disabling /enabling discovery is working is because if goes 
thru 
iscsi_sess_destroy() / iscsi_lun_destroy() which will remove the LUNs 
structures in the driver.  Disabling removes them all and when you re-enable it 
just add the current ones back.  I can't think of anything specific that would 
be causing a problem on your other host though.  Maybe on the disable the 
detach of the sd driver is sending a target reset out.  That could impact the 
other initiators although I wouldn't expect a minute or two delay.  There is 
nothing specific in the iSCSI initiator that would be causing that issue.  I 
suspect its a target driver detach issuing a reset.  Maybe someone else could 
confirm that?

(This was just a really really fast examination of the current code.)
 
 
This message posted from opensolaris.org
_______________________________________________
storage-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/storage-discuss

Reply via email to