mirror of
https://github.com/SCST-project/scst.git
synced 2026-05-17 02:31:27 +00:00
e8b67bb755
- Minor cleanups git-svn-id: http://svn.code.sf.net/p/scst/svn/trunk@675 d57e44dd-8a1f-0410-8b47-8ef2f437770f
101 lines
5.1 KiB
HTML
101 lines
5.1 KiB
HTML
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd">
|
|
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en" lang="en">
|
|
<head>
|
|
<meta name="Keywords" content="Generic SCSI Target Middle Level for Linux" />
|
|
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1" />
|
|
<meta name="author" content="Daniel Fernandes"/>
|
|
<meta name="Robots" content="index,follow" />
|
|
<link rel="stylesheet" href="images/Orange.css" type="text/css" />
|
|
<title>SCST: Generic SCSI Target Middle Level for Linux</title>
|
|
</head>
|
|
|
|
<body>
|
|
<!-- wrap starts here -->
|
|
<div id="wrap">
|
|
<div id="header">
|
|
<div class="logoimg"></div><h1 id="logo"><span class="orange"></span></h1>
|
|
<h2 id="slogan">SCSI Target Middle Level for Linux</h2>
|
|
</div>
|
|
|
|
<div id="menu">
|
|
<ul>
|
|
<li id="sponsorship"><a href="sponsorship.html">Sponsorship</a></li>
|
|
<li><a href="index.html">Home</a></li>
|
|
<li><a href="http://www.sourceforge.net/projects/scst">Main</a></li>
|
|
<li><a href="targets.html">Drivers</a></li>
|
|
<li><a href="downloads.html">Downloads</a></li>
|
|
<li><a href="contributing.html">Contributing</a></li>
|
|
<li id="current"><a href="scstvsstgt.html">SCST vs STGT</a></li>
|
|
</ul>
|
|
</div>
|
|
|
|
<!-- content-wrap starts here -->
|
|
<div id="content-wrap">
|
|
<div id="main">
|
|
<h1>SCST vs STGT</h1>
|
|
<p><strong><a href="http://stgt.berlios.de/">STGT</a></strong> is alternative, independent from SCST implementation
|
|
of SCSI target framework for Linux. It has different architecture, where SCSI target state machine is placed in
|
|
the user space, while in SCST all the processing done in the kernel. Such architecture as STGT has was acknowledged
|
|
at the moment by the Linux SCSI subsystem maintainers as a "right" one, so kernel's part of STGT quickly
|
|
found its way to the kernel.</p>
|
|
|
|
<p>But such architecture has several inherent problems. Among them performance and complexity.
|
|
See description for the set of patches, submitted for the first iteration of in-kernel inclusion review and comments
|
|
<a href="http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/12/10/245">http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/12/10/245</a></p>
|
|
|
|
<p>See also the following important discussions:
|
|
<ul>
|
|
|
|
<li><span><a href="http://news.gmane.org/find-root.php?message_id=%3ce2e108260801170127w2937b2afg9bef324efa945e43%40mail.gmail.com%3e">
|
|
"Performance of SCST versus STGT"</a> for performance comparison.</span></li>
|
|
|
|
<li><span><a href="http://news.gmane.org/find-root.php?message_id=%3c463F36AC.3010207%40vlnb.net%3e">
|
|
"Question for pass-through target design"</a></span></li>
|
|
|
|
<li><span><a href="http://news.gmane.org/find-root.php?message_id=%3c43987F75.2000301%40vlnb.net%3e">
|
|
"Stgt a new version of iscsi target?"</a>, especially pay attention to
|
|
this message: <a href="http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.scsi/21073">
|
|
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.scsi/21073</a> for motivation why STGT's architecture was considered "right".
|
|
</span></li>
|
|
|
|
<li><span>Thread
|
|
<a href="http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?thread_name=472F7FA4.7040303%40wpkg.org&forum_name=scst-devel">
|
|
"Relationship between SCST and in-kernel SCSI_TGT"</a>
|
|
</span></li>
|
|
|
|
<li><span><a href="http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.scsi/36417/focus=37273">this</a>
|
|
message in thread "Open-FCoE on linux-scsi" for more details.</span></li>
|
|
|
|
</ul></p>
|
|
|
|
<p>Also you shouldn't be deceived by the fact that some (small) part of STGT was accepted into the kernel.<br>
|
|
It doesn't mean that STGT has the <strong>"kernel quality"</strong>. In fact, STGT as a whole similarly to any other
|
|
out-of-tree project lives on its own, hence has its own quality level, which isn't necessary better, than the
|
|
quality level of SCST. Actually, from such important aspect of quality as simplicity, it
|
|
might be quite contrary: e.g. SCST isn't required to support HIGHMEM (nowadays it
|
|
isn't necessary, but required for all in-kernel components), which allowed to simplify memory management a lot.</p>
|
|
|
|
<p>Interesting, on 2008 Linux Storage & Filesystem Workshop, namely in
|
|
<a href="http://www.usenix.org/event/lsf08/tech/lsf08sums.pdf">"Storage Track"</a> and
|
|
<a href="http://www.usenix.org/event/lsf08/tech/IO_bellinger.pdf">"Linux/iSCSI and a Generic Target Mode Storage
|
|
Engine for Linux v2.6"</a> documents, a special emphasis was put on the fact that SCST has "older" design,
|
|
while STGT has the "current" design. Well, this seems to be a good sign, because SCST opponents have come to so
|
|
little to say against it, so they started to use psychological arguments, exploiting the fact that most people
|
|
think that "newer" is always better.</p>
|
|
|
|
</div>
|
|
</div>
|
|
</div>
|
|
<!-- wrap ends here -->
|
|
|
|
<!-- footer starts here -->
|
|
<div id="footer">
|
|
<p>
|
|
© Copyright 2008 <b><font color="#EC981F">Vladislav Bolkhovitin & others.</font>
|
|
Design by: <b><font color="#EC981F">Daniel Fernandes</font></b>
|
|
|
|
</p>
|
|
</div>
|
|
<!-- footer ends here -->
|
|
</body>
|
|
</html>
|