All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Keith Busch <keith.busch@intel.com>
To: Mike Snitzer <snitzer@redhat.com>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
	dm-devel@redhat.com, linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: hch's native NVMe multipathing [was: Re: [PATCH 1/2] Don't blacklist nvme]
Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2017 12:38:56 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170216173856.GB17828@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170216151337.GA12678@redhat.com>

On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 10:13:37AM -0500, Mike Snitzer wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 16 2017 at  9:26am -0500,
> Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org> wrote:
>
> > just a little new code in the block layer, and a move of the path
> > selectors from dm to the block layer.  I would not call this
> > fragmentation.
> 
> I'm fine with the path selectors getting moved out; maybe it'll
> encourage new path selectors to be developed.
> 
> But there will need to be some userspace interface stood up to support
> your native NVMe multipathing (you may not think it needed but think in
> time there will be a need to configure _something_).  That is the
> fragmentation I'm referring to.

I'm not sure what Christoph's proposal looks like, but I have to agree
that multipath support directly in the kernel without requiring user
space to setup the mpath block device is easier for everyone. The only
NVMe specific part, though, just needs to be how it reports unique
identifiers to the multipath layer.

Maybe I'm not seeing the bigger picture. Is there some part to multipath
that the kernel is not in a better position to handle?

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: keith.busch@intel.com (Keith Busch)
Subject: hch's native NVMe multipathing [was: Re: [PATCH 1/2] Don't blacklist nvme]
Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2017 12:38:56 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170216173856.GB17828@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170216151337.GA12678@redhat.com>

On Thu, Feb 16, 2017@10:13:37AM -0500, Mike Snitzer wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 16 2017 at  9:26am -0500,
> Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org> wrote:
>
> > just a little new code in the block layer, and a move of the path
> > selectors from dm to the block layer.  I would not call this
> > fragmentation.
> 
> I'm fine with the path selectors getting moved out; maybe it'll
> encourage new path selectors to be developed.
> 
> But there will need to be some userspace interface stood up to support
> your native NVMe multipathing (you may not think it needed but think in
> time there will be a need to configure _something_).  That is the
> fragmentation I'm referring to.

I'm not sure what Christoph's proposal looks like, but I have to agree
that multipath support directly in the kernel without requiring user
space to setup the mpath block device is easier for everyone. The only
NVMe specific part, though, just needs to be how it reports unique
identifiers to the multipath layer.

Maybe I'm not seeing the bigger picture. Is there some part to multipath
that the kernel is not in a better position to handle?

  reply	other threads:[~2017-02-16 17:38 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   ` hch's native NVMe multipathing [was: Re: [PATCH 1/2] Don't blacklist nvme] Mike Snitzer
2017-02-16  2:53     ` 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 [this message]
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=20170216173856.GB17828@localhost.localdomain \
    --to=keith.busch@intel.com \
    --cc=dm-devel@redhat.com \
    --cc=hch@infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=snitzer@redhat.com \
    /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.