[SPDK] Re: About SMA + IPU

--===============6939533049619368712==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Yibo Cai <Yibo.Cai(a)arm.com>
> Sent: Monday, June 27, 2022 8:01 AM
> To: Storage Performance Development Kit <spdk(a)lists.01.org>
> Subject: [SPDK] Re: About SMA + IPU
>
> So, in cloud storage environment (e.g., kubernetes + csi), looks orchestr=
ator
> is still responsible for most of the control plane rpcs that's not in cur=
rent SMA
> scope.

Correct, the orchestrator is responsible for sending the RPCs to configure =
the target system.

> Do we want to support more commands in SMA? =


Yes, we do want to support more commands in SMA, although we're mostly thin=
king about the initiator side.

> Does it make sense to add a grpc method to transfer low level spdk rpc co=
mmands (json string)
> transparently, or we prefer higher level abstractions?

Ideally, we'd have a high-level abstraction for everything, but I can see h=
ow a passthrough method like that could be useful in some cases (e.g. to us=
e the gRPC transport to send SPDK JSON-RPCs to configure the target). So, i=
f there's a demand for it, I don't see any reason not to add it.

Konrad=20
--===============6939533049619368712==--