Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933669Ab1ERTRp (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 May 2011 15:17:45 -0400 Received: from na3sys010aog101.obsmtp.com ([74.125.245.70]:45283 "HELO na3sys010aog101.obsmtp.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S933451Ab1ERTRn (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 May 2011 15:17:43 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: <1305682604-21383-1-git-send-email-nab@linux-iscsi.org> <20110518170556.GB2595@obsidianresearch.com> From: Roland Dreier Date: Wed, 18 May 2011 12:17:21 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [RFC] ib_srpt: initial .40-rc1 drivers/infiniband/ulp/srpt merge To: Bart Van Assche Cc: Jason Gunthorpe , "Nicholas A. Bellinger" , linux-kernel , linux-scsi , linux-rmda , Vu Pham , David Dillow , James Bottomley Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1061 Lines: 21 On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 11:02 AM, Bart Van Assche wrote: > Thanks for the feedback. I'm still wondering though about the > usefulness of disabling / enabling SRPT per HCA port. For the use > cases I know about SRP communication over all target ports will be > enabled as soon as target configuration has finished and more > fine-grained access configuration will occur by allowing/disallowing > certain initiators to log in. I definitely think that allowing the flexibility to configure ports individually is required. It's easy to imagine a case with a separate front-end and back-end networks on the two HCA ports (this would be a pretty normal ethernet config), where only one port should be a target port. It may not be how people do things now but it should at least be possible. - R. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/