From: Mike Snitzer <snitzer@redhat.com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Cc: Keith Busch <keith.busch@intel.com>,
dm-devel@redhat.com, linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org
Subject: hch's native NVMe multipathing [was: Re: [PATCH 1/2] Don't blacklist nvme]
Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2017 21:53:57 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170216025357.GA9241@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170215145617.GA4241@infradead.org>
On Wed, Feb 15 2017 at 9:56am -0500,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 14, 2017 at 04:19:13PM -0500, Keith Busch wrote:
> > These devices are mulitpath capable, and have been able to stack with
> > dm-mpath since kernel 4.2.
>
> Can we make this conditional on something? I have native NVMe
> multipathing almost ready for the next merge window which is a lot easier
> to use and faster than dm. So I don't want us to be locked into this
> mode just before that.
You've avoided discussing this on any level (and I guess you aren't
going to LSF/MM?). Yet you're expecting to just drop it into the tree
without a care in the world about the implications.
Nobody has interest in Linux multipathing becoming fragmented.
If every transport implemented their own multipathing the end-user would
be amazingly screwed trying to keep track of all the
quirks/configuration/management of each.
Not saying multipath-tools is great, nor that DM multipath is god's
gift. But substantiating _why_ you need this "native NVMe
multipathing" would go a really long way to justifying your effort.
For starters, how about you show just how much better than DM multipath
this native NVMe multipathing performs? NOTE: it'd imply you put effort
to making DM multipath work with NVMe.. if you've sat on that code too
that'd be amazingly unfortunate/frustrating.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: snitzer@redhat.com (Mike Snitzer)
Subject: hch's native NVMe multipathing [was: Re: [PATCH 1/2] Don't blacklist nvme]
Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2017 21:53:57 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170216025357.GA9241@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170215145617.GA4241@infradead.org>
On Wed, Feb 15 2017 at 9:56am -0500,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 14, 2017@04:19:13PM -0500, Keith Busch wrote:
> > These devices are mulitpath capable, and have been able to stack with
> > dm-mpath since kernel 4.2.
>
> Can we make this conditional on something? I have native NVMe
> multipathing almost ready for the next merge window which is a lot easier
> to use and faster than dm. So I don't want us to be locked into this
> mode just before that.
You've avoided discussing this on any level (and I guess you aren't
going to LSF/MM?). Yet you're expecting to just drop it into the tree
without a care in the world about the implications.
Nobody has interest in Linux multipathing becoming fragmented.
If every transport implemented their own multipathing the end-user would
be amazingly screwed trying to keep track of all the
quirks/configuration/management of each.
Not saying multipath-tools is great, nor that DM multipath is god's
gift. But substantiating _why_ you need this "native NVMe
multipathing" would go a really long way to justifying your effort.
For starters, how about you show just how much better than DM multipath
this native NVMe multipathing performs? NOTE: it'd imply you put effort
to making DM multipath work with NVMe.. if you've sat on that code too
that'd be amazingly unfortunate/frustrating.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-02-16 2:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 55+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-02-14 21:19 [PATCH 1/2] Don't blacklist nvme Keith Busch
2017-02-14 21:19 ` [PATCH 2/2] Fill NVMe specific path info Keith Busch
2017-02-20 17:57 ` Benjamin Marzinski
2017-02-21 21:06 ` Keith Busch
2017-02-14 21:35 ` [PATCH 1/2] Don't blacklist nvme Bart Van Assche
2017-02-14 23:00 ` Keith Busch
2017-02-15 14:57 ` Christoph Hellwig
2017-02-15 17:24 ` Keith Busch
2017-02-16 1:58 ` Mike Snitzer
2017-02-16 2:01 ` Mike Snitzer
2017-02-16 2:35 ` Mike Snitzer
2017-02-15 14:56 ` Christoph Hellwig
2017-02-16 2:53 ` Mike Snitzer [this message]
2017-02-16 2:53 ` hch's native NVMe multipathing [was: Re: [PATCH 1/2] Don't blacklist nvme] Mike Snitzer
2017-02-16 5:00 ` Bart Van Assche
2017-02-16 5:00 ` [dm-devel] " Bart Van Assche
2017-02-16 12:37 ` Mike Snitzer
2017-02-16 12:37 ` Mike Snitzer
2017-02-16 19:46 ` Bart Van Assche
2017-02-16 19:46 ` Bart Van Assche
2017-02-16 20:23 ` Mike Snitzer
2017-02-16 20:23 ` Mike Snitzer
2017-02-16 20:58 ` Bart Van Assche
2017-02-16 20:58 ` Bart Van Assche
2017-02-16 14:26 ` Christoph Hellwig
2017-02-16 14:26 ` [dm-devel] " Christoph Hellwig
2017-02-16 15:13 ` Mike Snitzer
2017-02-16 15:13 ` Mike Snitzer
2017-02-16 17:38 ` Keith Busch
2017-02-16 17:38 ` Keith Busch
2017-02-16 17:37 ` Bart Van Assche
2017-02-16 17:37 ` Bart Van Assche
2017-02-16 18:07 ` Keith Busch
2017-02-16 18:07 ` Keith Busch
2017-02-16 18:21 ` Mike Snitzer
2017-02-16 18:21 ` Mike Snitzer
2017-02-16 20:40 ` Keith Busch
2017-02-16 20:40 ` Keith Busch
2017-02-17 9:04 ` [dm-devel] " hch
2017-02-17 9:04 ` hch
2017-02-17 14:43 ` Mike Snitzer
2017-02-17 14:43 ` Mike Snitzer
2017-02-16 18:05 ` Sagi Grimberg
2017-02-16 18:05 ` Sagi Grimberg
2017-02-17 9:05 ` [dm-devel] " Christoph Hellwig
2017-02-17 9:05 ` Christoph Hellwig
2017-02-17 14:37 ` Mike Snitzer
2017-02-17 14:37 ` Mike Snitzer
2017-02-17 9:33 ` [dm-devel] " Christoph Hellwig
2017-02-17 9:33 ` Christoph Hellwig
2017-02-17 14:32 ` Mike Snitzer
2017-02-17 14:32 ` Mike Snitzer
2017-02-20 18:17 ` [PATCH 1/2] Don't blacklist nvme Benjamin Marzinski
2017-02-20 14:14 ` Mike Snitzer
2017-02-27 5:37 ` Christophe Varoqui
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20170216025357.GA9241@redhat.com \
--to=snitzer@redhat.com \
--cc=dm-devel@redhat.com \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=keith.busch@intel.com \
--cc=linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.