[linux-lvm] Re: *** ANNOUNCEMENT *** LVM 0.9.1 beta1 available at www.sistina.com

[linux-lvm] Re: *** ANNOUNCEMENT *** LVM 0.9.1 beta1 available at www.sistina.com

[Andreas Dilger]

Anton, you write:
> Have a look at 2.4, arch/sparc64/kernel/ioctl32.c

Yuk.

> Would it be possible to clean up the ioctl interface so we dont need
> such large hacks for LVM support? I can do the work but I want to be
> sure you guys will agree to it.

What is the reason for all this?  Alignment/wordsize/other?  If you look
at the IOP10 code, much of the in-core data structs were changed to int
or long, so this sparc code may not be necessary.  It may in fact be
damaging, because I don't know if any of the LVM developers even know it
is there, and surely it will be out of sync...

Cheers, Andreas
-- 
Andreas Dilger  \ "If a man ate a pound of pasta and a pound of antipasto,
                 \  would they cancel out, leaving him still hungry?"
http://www-mddsp.enel.ucalgary.ca/People/adilger/               -- Dogbert

Re: [linux-lvm] Re: *** ANNOUNCEMENT *** LVM 0.9.1 beta1 available at www.sistina.com

[Christoph Hellwig]

On Fri, Jan 12, 2001 at 06:43:23PM -0700, Andreas Dilger wrote:
> Anton, you write:
> > Have a look at 2.4, arch/sparc64/kernel/ioctl32.c
> 
> Yuk.
> 
> > Would it be possible to clean up the ioctl interface so we dont need
> > such large hacks for LVM support? I can do the work but I want to be
> > sure you guys will agree to it.
> 
> What is the reason for all this?  Alignment/wordsize/other?  If you look
> at the IOP10 code, much of the in-core data structs were changed to int
> or long, so this sparc code may not be necessary.

The longs are the biggest problem AFAICS.
long is 64bit on sparc64 and 32bit on sparc32...

	Christoph

-- 
Of course it doesn't work. We've performed a software upgrade.

Re: [linux-lvm] Re: *** ANNOUNCEMENT *** LVM 0.9.1 beta1 available at www.sistina.com

[Patrick Caulfield]

On Sat, Jan 13, 2001 at 05:06:16PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 12, 2001 at 06:43:23PM -0700, Andreas Dilger wrote:
> > Anton, you write:
> > > Have a look at 2.4, arch/sparc64/kernel/ioctl32.c
> > 
> > Yuk.
> > 
> > > Would it be possible to clean up the ioctl interface so we dont need
> > > such large hacks for LVM support? I can do the work but I want to be
> > > sure you guys will agree to it.

If you're prepared to do the work we'd be glad to accept the patch - please send
it to me or the list so I can check over it before committing it. As we don't
have an UltraSPARC available for testing it's probably better done by someone
who does !
 
> > What is the reason for all this?  Alignment/wordsize/other?  If you look
> > at the IOP10 code, much of the in-core data structs were changed to int
> > or long, so this sparc code may not be necessary.
> 
> The longs are the biggest problem AFAICS.
> long is 64bit on sparc64 and 32bit on sparc32...

There are still a few ulong members in lvm.h, they should be uint32_t 

patrick

Re: [linux-lvm] Re: *** ANNOUNCEMENT *** LVM 0.9.1 beta1 available at www.sistina.com

[Charles Duffy]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1307 bytes --]

On Tue, Jan 16, 2001 at 08:51:18AM +0000, Patrick Caulfield wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 13, 2001 at 05:06:16PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 12, 2001 at 06:43:23PM -0700, Andreas Dilger wrote:
> > > > Would it be possible to clean up the ioctl interface so we
> > > > dont need such large hacks for LVM support? I can do the work
> > > > but I want to be sure you guys will agree to it.
> 
> If you're prepared to do the work we'd be glad to accept the patch -
> please send it to me or the list so I can check over it before
> committing it. As we don't have an UltraSPARC available for testing
> it's probably better done by someone who does !

I have an Ultra-1 available, presently in use as a prototyping system.
It's not currently using LVM and there's no unpartitioned space on the
drive, but if one of the core developers (or otherwise someone I have
reason to trust) wants to try testing LVM over loopback (or something
of that sort), I can provide access.

I don't have the time to do testing myself, unless someone can provide
a specific set of instructions (ie. the nature of an expected bug is
known; the only question is its presence).

Btw, I can only promise availability for about a week or so; the
machine may become a production system after that time.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 232 bytes --]

Re: [linux-lvm] Re: *** ANNOUNCEMENT *** LVM 0.9.1 beta1 available at www.sistina.com

[Patrick Caulfield]

On Tue, Jan 16, 2001 at 12:10:46PM -0800, Charles Duffy wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 16, 2001 at 08:51:18AM +0000, Patrick Caulfield wrote:
> > On Sat, Jan 13, 2001 at 05:06:16PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > > On Fri, Jan 12, 2001 at 06:43:23PM -0700, Andreas Dilger wrote:
> > > > > Would it be possible to clean up the ioctl interface so we
> > > > > dont need such large hacks for LVM support? I can do the work
> > > > > but I want to be sure you guys will agree to it.
> > 
> > If you're prepared to do the work we'd be glad to accept the patch -
> > please send it to me or the list so I can check over it before
> > committing it. As we don't have an UltraSPARC available for testing
> > it's probably better done by someone who does !
> 
> I have an Ultra-1 available, presently in use as a prototyping system.
> It's not currently using LVM and there's no unpartitioned space on the
> drive, but if one of the core developers (or otherwise someone I have
> reason to trust) wants to try testing LVM over loopback (or something
> of that sort), I can provide access.

I was hoping that Anton would volunteer as per his message in linux-kernel :-)

Having looked in (too much) depth at the code I decided I don't know enough
about Ultra-SPARCs to be able to do this on some else's machine. 

I've worked fairly extensively on Alphas (which are a pure 64 bit machine)
but the sparc seems to have some bizarre 32 bit modes I know nothing about.


patrick