> The scsi support depends on two sources. One from OS target driver
> and another from spec. Even wide scsi support 16 targets, most Unix
> OSes support 32 and more. For example, Solaris support 128 target and
Wrong. 65535.
> 32 lun each.
Wrong. 256 (I've done this much with Fibre Channel).
Both these are driven by the bits available in the struct scsi_address
structure.
Further, the NDI framework which everything inside Solaris is shifting to
completely separates addresses out from limitations as the dev_info_t is
constructed by the nexus driver and the address can be arbitrary. In
theory this means that even without changing the target drivers the
a_target, a_lun and a_sublun fields could be recycled to be a flat 32 bit
integer which means you get 4GB seperate addresses *per HBA instance*.
>
> I am doing Fibre Channel device support which using SCSI III protocal.
> Currently many
> vendor requires large number device support. For example, EMC asks at least
> 256 LUN is
> supported.
Again, this is trivial. Try doing at least first level SCCLUN with 65535
luns.
> for scsi target support and max. 8 LUN is supported, still I have question
> of the limitation of target and lun current Linux can support? This is due
> to my feeling that there should be a limitation for target support and 8 lun
> support is too few. Also Benjamin mentioned 127 lun supoort although I
> don't know where the number comes from.
The problem is more serious in what you can dig up for device nodes than
actual internal scsi addressing.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/