From: hare@suse.de (Hannes Reinecke)
Subject: [PATCH 0/3] Provide more fine grained control over multipathing
Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2018 08:19:21 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180604081921.3cedecbc@pentland.suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <f4951571-d37d-73cd-1d6c-0ca84647d5ac@kernel.dk>
On Wed, 30 May 2018 13:05:46 -0600
Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk> wrote:
> On 5/29/18 5:27 PM, Mike Snitzer wrote:
> > On Tue, May 29 2018 at 4:09am -0400,
> > Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de> wrote:
> >
> >> On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 09:22:40AM +0200, Johannes Thumshirn
> >> wrote:
> >>> For a "Plan B" we can still use the global knob that's already in
> >>> place (even if this reminds me so much about scsi-mq which at
> >>> least we haven't turned on in fear of performance regressions).
> >>>
> >>> Let's drop the discussion here, I don't think it leads to
> >>> something else than flamewars.
> >>
> >> If our plan A doesn't work we can go back to these patches. For
> >> now I'd rather have everyone spend their time on making Plan A
> >> work then preparing for contingencies. Nothing prevents anyone
> >> from using these patches already out there if they really want to,
> >> but I'd recommend people are very careful about doing so as you'll
> >> lock yourself into a long-term maintainance burden.
> >
> > Restating (for others): this patchset really isn't about
> > contingencies. It is about choice.
> >
> > Since we're at an impasse, in the hopes of soliciting definitive
> > feedback from Jens and Linus, I'm going to attempt to reset the
> > discussion for their entry.
> >
> > In summary, we have a classic example of a maintainer stalemate
> > here: 1) Christoph, as NVMe co-maintainer, doesn't want to allow
> > native NVMe multipath to actively coexist with dm-multipath's NVMe
> > support on the same host.
> > 2) I, as DM maintainer, would like to offer this flexibility to
> > users -- by giving them opt-in choice to continue using existing
> > dm-multipath with NVMe. (also, both Red Hat and SUSE would like to
> > offer this).
> >
> > There is no technical reason why they cannot coexist. Hence this
> > simple patchset that was originally offered by Johannes Thumshirn
> > with contributions from myself.
>
> Here's what I think - flag days tend to suck. They may be more
> convenient for developers, but they inflict pain on users. Sometimes
> they prevent them from moving forward, since updates are now gated on
> external dependencies. Moving forward with a new architecture is
> great, but proper care has to be given to existing users of
> multipath, regardless of how few they may be.
>
> This patchset seems pretty clean and minimalist. Realistically, I'm
> guessing that SUSE and RH will ship it regardless of upstream status.
>
Without it we're having a choice of disappointing (paying) customers or
disappointing the upstream community.
Guess.
Cheers,
Hannes
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-06-04 6:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 52+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-05-25 12:53 [PATCH 0/3] Provide more fine grained control over multipathing Johannes Thumshirn
2018-05-25 12:53 ` [PATCH 1/3] nvme: provide a way to disable nvme mpath per subsystem Johannes Thumshirn
2018-05-25 13:47 ` Mike Snitzer
2018-05-31 8:17 ` Sagi Grimberg
2018-05-25 12:53 ` [PATCH 2/3] nvme multipath: added SUBSYS_ATTR_RW Johannes Thumshirn
2018-05-25 12:53 ` [PATCH 3/3] nvme multipath: add dev_attr_mpath_personality Johannes Thumshirn
2018-05-25 13:05 ` [PATCH 0/3] Provide more fine grained control over multipathing Christoph Hellwig
2018-05-25 13:58 ` Mike Snitzer
2018-05-25 14:12 ` Christoph Hellwig
2018-05-25 14:50 ` Mike Snitzer
2018-05-29 1:19 ` Martin K. Petersen
2018-05-29 3:02 ` Mike Snitzer
2018-05-29 7:18 ` Hannes Reinecke
2018-05-29 7:22 ` Johannes Thumshirn
2018-05-29 8:09 ` Christoph Hellwig
2018-05-29 9:54 ` Mike Snitzer
2018-05-29 23:27 ` Mike Snitzer
2018-05-30 19:05 ` Jens Axboe
2018-05-30 19:59 ` Mike Snitzer
2018-06-04 6:19 ` Hannes Reinecke [this message]
2018-06-04 7:18 ` Johannes Thumshirn
2018-06-04 12:59 ` Christoph Hellwig
2018-06-04 13:27 ` Mike Snitzer
2018-05-31 2:42 ` Ming Lei
2018-05-30 21:20 ` Sagi Grimberg
2018-05-30 22:02 ` Mike Snitzer
2018-05-31 8:37 ` Sagi Grimberg
2018-05-31 12:37 ` Mike Snitzer
2018-05-31 16:34 ` Christoph Hellwig
2018-06-01 4:11 ` Mike Snitzer
2018-05-31 16:36 ` Christoph Hellwig
2018-05-31 16:33 ` Christoph Hellwig
2018-05-31 18:17 ` Mike Snitzer
2018-06-01 2:40 ` Martin K. Petersen
2018-06-01 4:24 ` Mike Snitzer
2018-06-01 14:09 ` Martin K. Petersen
2018-06-01 15:21 ` Mike Snitzer
2018-06-03 11:00 ` Sagi Grimberg
2018-06-03 16:06 ` Mike Snitzer
2018-06-04 11:46 ` Sagi Grimberg
2018-06-04 12:48 ` Johannes Thumshirn
2018-05-30 22:44 ` Mike Snitzer
2018-05-31 8:51 ` Sagi Grimberg
2018-05-31 12:41 ` Mike Snitzer
2018-06-04 21:58 ` Roland Dreier
2018-06-05 4:42 ` Christoph Hellwig
2018-06-05 22:57 ` Roland Dreier
2018-06-06 9:51 ` Christoph Hellwig
2018-06-06 9:32 ` Sagi Grimberg
2018-06-06 9:50 ` Christoph Hellwig
2018-05-25 14:22 ` Johannes Thumshirn
2018-05-25 14:30 ` Christoph Hellwig
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=20180604081921.3cedecbc@pentland.suse.de \
--to=hare@suse.de \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).