Re: iSCSI: unsolicited data

[Sandeep Joshi <sandeepj@research.bell-labs.com>]

Julian,

Perhaps this thread was missed..could you please elaborate on this 
deadlock issue..when exactly does it occur?  
Note that I am not asking for out-of-order data!

There was one more question - regarding the allowance given
to the initiator to *not* send unsolicited PDUs right after
the command PDUs, which raises persistent questions.

See http://www.pdl.cmu.edu/mailinglists/ips/mail/msg07930.html
for the latest question on this issue.

IIRC, the reasoning here was that this helps the target in "positioning"
operations - since it gets a few commands first, and then the data.
By positioning, do you imply disk/tape seeks or something else ?
Note that the draft must atleast mention the above rationale if we
wish initiators to behave as such, and also targets to optimize for it.

Regards,
-Sandeep

"Mallikarjun C." wrote:
> I however could not really see a deadlock per se - my comment was to
> understand
> what it is.    More comments would certainly help.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Julian Satran" <Julian_Satran@il.ibm.com>
> > Mallikarjun,
> >
> > The deadlock free requirement here goes a bit deeper than your comment may
> > suggest.
> > Unsolicited data needs are very hard to predict and ordering them may
> > remove the need to do so to a large extent.