[Open-FCoE] FYI : Re: Setup question
charlesz at opengridcomputing.com
Wed Sep 24 14:52:21 UTC 2008
I have brought up this thread initially, here's my latest update.
I get p2p working with the latest code post on the web using a back 2
back connection on one pair of my set up, both machines have dual
processors, 1g Ethernet card. Joe Eykholt has provided me some valuable
suggestion during my debugging process, many thanks.
However, after duplicate the environment to another pair of machines,
with quad processors, 10g Ethernet nic, the target crash right after
plogi phase. The reason of its crash is that
fcs_local_port_prli_accept() call into scst_init_session() with the
target pointer as NULL. The crash happens at the same spot for back 2
back connections and a switch in the middle.
So in short, I think the latest code for p2p is working. I believe it
can work even with a switch in the middle if configured correctly.
For my problem, I will appreciate if some one here who's more familiar
with the code path can point me a direction where should I look back to
trace this problem. Here's a log trace to show you my problem:
Sep 23 16:26:17 vic100 kernel: fcs_local_port_prli_accept: PRLI
callback. remote 10101 local 10102
Sep 23 16:26:17 vic100 kernel: : ENTRY scst_register_session
Sep 23 16:26:17 vic100 kernel: : ENTRY scst_alloc_session
Sep 23 16:26:17 vic100 kernel: : EXIT scst_alloc_session
Sep 23 16:26:17 vic100 kernel: : scst_register_session:5031:Adding
sess ffff8102099eacb0 to scst_sess_init_list
Sep 23 16:26:17 vic100 kernel: : EXIT scst_register_session
Sep 23 16:26:17 vic100 kernel: fcs_local_port_prli_accept: accept remote
Sep 23 16:26:17 vic100 kernel: : scst_mgmt_thread:5162:Removing
sess ffff8102099eacb0 from scst_sess_init_list
Sep 23 16:26:17 vic100 kernel: : ENTRY scst_init_session
Sep 23 16:26:17 vic100 kernel: fc_seq_start: exch 6 f_ctl 800000 seq
0 f_ctl 0
Sep 23 16:26:17 vic100 kernel: : scst_init_session:4923:c.z.,
session:0xffff8102099eacb0, init name:2000000743054364,
The above tgt pointer is NULL. Thanks very much for any help.
From: devel-bounces at open-fcoe.org [mailto:devel-bounces at open-fcoe.org]
On Behalf Of P Mumbai
Sent: Monday, September 22, 2008 11:55 PM
To: Mithlesh Thukral; Love, Robert W
Cc: weny at promise.com; devel at open-fcoe.org
Subject: Re: [Open-FCoE] FYI : Re: Setup question
Today (9/22), in a FCoE session during the Storage Developer
Conference, it was said that Point 2 Point, between FCoE initiator and
target, is not supported in the first FCoE standard (FC-BB-5), and it
will be considered for next version of FCoE standard.
My questions are:
1. First, I'd like to confirm this, and then anyone in the
knows why P2P is not in the first version of FCoE Standard? Any
technical reasons? Is this the reason that P2P mode as discussed in
the below mails is not working?
2. If i move to the earlier FCoE code(before re-architecture) will
be working, what standard does it follow?
3. If there is no standard, and implementations are out there, I
be concern about interoperability. How do people the community look at
If this is not the mailing list to talk about all these questions,
please excuse me and point me to the correct mailing list.
Thanks You all in advance.
On Tue, Sep 16, 2008 at 6:09 AM, Mithlesh Thukral
<mithlesh at linsyssoft.com> wrote:
> Seems like P2P open FCoE is broken for now.
> Mithlesh Thukral
> On Saturday 13 September 2008 02:17:13 am charles zhuang wrote:
>> Seems the p2p mode between initiator and sw target is broken for the
>> re-architecture code, I likely to know how do you guys test the
>> initiator when you do the re-arch? Does it have to go thru a fcgw or
>> real switch fabric? Is there other easy way that I can get this set
>> with a connection like before?
>> Thanks again for your help.
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Robert Love [mailto:robert.w.love at linux.intel.com]
>> Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2008 6:20 PM
>> To: charles zhuang
>> Cc: devel at open-fcoe.org
>> Subject: Re: [Open-FCoE] Setup question
>> On Thu, 2008-09-11 at 16:26 -0500, charles zhuang wrote:
>> > Also, on the initiator, I don't have openfc.ko, I only have
>> > libfc.ko, scsi_transport_fc.ko, and scsi_mod.ko. Did I miss
>> > 2. By following the quick start on initiator, my initiator system
>> > doesn't have fcconf. I guess I can use the same procedure on the
>> > quick start guide to build/install fcconf and hbaapi. I don't need
>> > openfctgt and scst. Is it correct?
>> fcconf was our user application before our re-architecture (the
>> that converted openfc.ko to libfc.ko). We had to remove fcconf
>> it was getting information from the kernel in the wrong way. We've
>> a small application fcoeadm that will create/destroy and soon we'll
>> adding code to report information like what fcconf did.
>> git clone git://open-fcoe.org/openfc/open-fcoe.git
>> You will need to use fcconf for the target because the target is
>> on our pre-architecture.
>> Unfortunately my guess is that point-to-point mode is broken for the
>> re-architecture code (the initiator), but I don't know for sure. It's
>> been untested for some time.
>> > Thanks very much for your help.
>> > charles
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > devel mailing list
>> > devel at open-fcoe.org
>> > http://www.open-fcoe.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
>> devel mailing list
>> devel at open-fcoe.org
> devel mailing list
> devel at open-fcoe.org
devel mailing list
devel at open-fcoe.org
More information about the devel