SORT BY:

LIST ORDER
THREAD
AUTHOR
SUBJECT


SEARCH

IPS HOME


    [Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

    Avoiding deadlock in iSCSI



    
    The problem:
    
    iSCSI, as currently spec'ed, allows SCSI commands and data to be
    interleaved fairly freely on a TCP connection. A target that stops
    reading from a TCP connection to avoid reading more command packets
    also prevents itself from reading data packets.  Those data packets
    may be criticial to making progress on the currently executing
    command.
    
    Note the issue appears with one TCP connection for control and data
    and even appears in many of the multiple connection schemes.
    
    Data in iSCSI comes in two forms:
    
    	1) solicited - data requested by target via RTT 
    	             - data requested by initiator via a SCSI command
    	2) unsolicited - data sent by initiator without having received an RTT
    
    The analysis below assumes that unsolicited data travels over the same
    TCP connection as SCSI commands. Otherwise, you run the risk of receiving
    unsolicited data before the relevant SCSI command (thus making
    implementations more complex).
    
    Four solutions:
    
    1) Don't overflow the command queue (i.e. use credits)
    	- and what do you do if a misbehaving initiator overflows
            your command queue anyway? Drop the connection?
    	
    	- requires you to reserve resources per initiator. some people
            may want to overcommit
    
    2) Allow dropping of SCSI commands when queue fills
    	- how do you clean up after a dropped SCSI command?
    	    - there may be other commands in the pipeline
    	
    	One approach: On command drop, the target enters an error
    	state. While in the error state, all newly received commands
    	terminate with an error until the initiator explicitly clears
    	the error state using a "clear error state" message.
    
    	You might think that TASK SET FULL and ACA mechanisms from SCSI
            could be used to attack this problem. However, TASK SET FULL errors
    	don't trigger ACA (in my reading of the SAM). Also, ACA is only
    	triggered by the current enabled command, not by random commands
    	entered into the task set.
    
    3) Put solicited data on a dedicated TCP connection. Require that
    unsolicited data MUST follow the command, ideally in the same iSCSI
    PDU
    
    4) (Do it like NFS) Make all transfers from initiator to target
    unsolicited. Make sure unsolicited data follows the command
    immediately.
       
    
    Of all the options, #1 and #4 sound the easiest to implement. #2 is more
    sophisticated than #1. #3 is just plain clever but that's rarely a good
    thing. :)  #4 has large ramifications on current SCSI target designs.
    
    -Costa
    


Home

Last updated: Tue Sep 04 01:07:22 2001
6315 messages in chronological order