Am Freitag, den 29.07.2005, 08:00 -0500 schrieb Brian Wolfe:
> On Fri, 2005-07-29 at 11:07 +0200, Arne Redlich wrote:
> > Below's a patch to fix IET's inability of handling separate MaxRxDSLs
> > for initiator and target.
> >
> > I didn't touch the kernel module's sanity check of the MaxRxDSLs,
> > although I feel it's currently too restrictive. If a too large value (>
> > 256k) is configured/announced for the target's/initiator's MaxRxDSL, the
> > minimum value (512) is chosen, which is IMHO a rather hard punishment.
> > I'd prefer the target to use the maximum supported value in this case.
> > Any thoughts on this?
> >
> > Arne
>
> Why not just go back to the default value on request errors like this
> instead of picking an arbitrary number?
Because we're not talking about request errors, but IET's (arbitrary)
limit of 256k. If an initiator *declares* via it's MaxRxDSL that it can
handle larger (valid) values, I think it's not the worst idea to use the
max. supported data segment length and not the default (8k) or even the
min. value (512). So at least when sending to the initiator I'm strongly
in favour of this approach.
Arne
--
Arne Redlich
Xiranet Communications GmbH
-------------------------------------------------------
SF.Net email is Sponsored by the Better Software Conference & EXPO September
19-22, 2005 * San Francisco, CA * Development Lifecycle Practices
Agile & Plan-Driven Development * Managing Projects & Teams * Testing & QA
Security * Process Improvement & Measurement * http://www.sqe.com/bsce5sf
|
