[0/9] Lustre VFS patches for 2.6

[0/9] Lustre VFS patches for 2.6

[Oleg Drokin]

Hello!

   Following this mail, there are nine patches necessary for Lustre support
   in 2.6. The patches are against latest 2.6 bk snapshot.
   Compared to previous sets of patches, this one does not change existing
   structure and field names therefore leaving kernel VFS API completely intact.
   Also raw operations approach is changed, extra inode operation is introduced
   that is supposed to be called at the end of parent lookup and do necessary
   operations, if possible.
   Of course it would be great if these patches would be included into the
   kernel right away (and that is one of the reasons this set of patches
   keeps old API intact). Also there were at least some interest in some of the
   patches from other parties (e.g. Trond Myklebust was interested in some
   intent changes as I remember) and we are ready to work with those so that
   the patches will suit their needs as well.

Bye,
    Oleg

Re: [0/9] Lustre VFS patches for 2.6

[Christoph Hellwig]

On Wed, Jul 07, 2004 at 03:47:32PM +0300, Oleg Drokin wrote:
> Hello!
> 
>    Following this mail, there are nine patches necessary for Lustre support
>    in 2.6. The patches are against latest 2.6 bk snapshot.
>    Compared to previous sets of patches, this one does not change existing
>    structure and field names therefore leaving kernel VFS API completely intact.
>    Also raw operations approach is changed, extra inode operation is introduced
>    that is supposed to be called at the end of parent lookup and do necessary
>    operations, if possible.
>    Of course it would be great if these patches would be included into the
>    kernel right away (and that is one of the reasons this set of patches
>    keeps old API intact). Also there were at least some interest in some of the
>    patches from other parties (e.g. Trond Myklebust was interested in some
>    intent changes as I remember) and we are ready to work with those so that
>    the patches will suit their needs as well.

So do you have plans to submit lustre for inclusion soon?  Else merging is
completely pointless as it'll fall victim to dead code removal real soon.

Re: [0/9] Lustre VFS patches for 2.6

[Oleg Drokin]

Hello!

On Wed, Jul 07, 2004 at 01:56:36PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> >    patches from other parties (e.g. Trond Myklebust was interested in some
> >    intent changes as I remember) and we are ready to work with those so that
> >    the patches will suit their needs as well.
> So do you have plans to submit lustre for inclusion soon?  Else merging is

Well, the problems with that is that lustre still evolves pretty quickly,
but once it is in kernel, it is sort of set in stone, no more easy changes
to the wire protocol, no more big internal changes (fast)...

> completely pointless as it'll fall victim to dead code removal real soon.

Well, there is not all that much "dead" code introduced (I hope). Esp. if some
of the new intent code will be used by NFS, for example.
And it is not all that dead too, there would be at least one off-tree user ;)

Bye,
    Oleg

Re: [0/9] Lustre VFS patches for 2.6

[Christoph Hellwig]

On Wed, Jul 07, 2004 at 06:14:04PM +0300, Oleg Drokin wrote:
> Well, there is not all that much "dead" code introduced (I hope). Esp. if some
> of the new intent code will be used by NFS, for example.

So let's wait until NFS uses it.

> And it is not all that dead too, there would be at least one off-tree user ;)

Which is equal to dead for all practical purposes of kernel maintaince.

Re: [0/9] Lustre VFS patches for 2.6

[John Richard Moser]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Interesting, but what exactly does this do?  Extra performance?  How?
Extra security?  Avoid deadlocks?

I'm not the kind of guy that just looks into a patch and claims to
understand all.  :)

Oleg Drokin wrote:
| Hello!
|
|    Following this mail, there are nine patches necessary for Lustre
support
|    in 2.6. The patches are against latest 2.6 bk snapshot.
|    Compared to previous sets of patches, this one does not change existing
|    structure and field names therefore leaving kernel VFS API
completely intact.
|    Also raw operations approach is changed, extra inode operation is
introduced
|    that is supposed to be called at the end of parent lookup and do
necessary
|    operations, if possible.
|    Of course it would be great if these patches would be included into the
|    kernel right away (and that is one of the reasons this set of patches
|    keeps old API intact). Also there were at least some interest in
some of the
|    patches from other parties (e.g. Trond Myklebust was interested in some
|    intent changes as I remember) and we are ready to work with those
so that
|    the patches will suit their needs as well.
|
| Bye,
|     Oleg
| -
| To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
| the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
| More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
| Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFA7BnFhDd4aOud5P8RAhiGAKCJJUqqL9aylG8hkfCAD4GpfMYK+wCdHIj6
njpYVufE205L7MFz04ysdI4=
=tDnN
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: [0/9] Lustre VFS patches for 2.6

[Oleg Drokin]

Hello!

On Wed, Jul 07, 2004 at 11:41:58AM -0400, John Richard Moser wrote:

> Interesting, but what exactly does this do?  Extra performance?  How?
> Extra security?  Avoid deadlocks?

These are just kernel bits necessary for Lustre to work.
Without lustre there should be no noticeable difference.
Lustre is a cluster filesystem and you can get more info about it at
http://www.lustre.org

Bye,
    Oleg

Re: [0/9] Lustre VFS patches for 2.6

[Lars Marowsky-Bree]

On 2004-07-07T15:47:32,
   Oleg Drokin <green@clusterfs.com> said:

> Hello!

Hi Oleg, the patches look good (but what do I know ;). Do you already
have a Lustre modules / user-space package to go with them so they could
be tested?


Sincerely,
    Lars Marowsky-Brée <lmb@suse.de>

-- 
High Availability & Clustering	    \ ever tried. ever failed. no matter.
SUSE Labs, Research and Development | try again. fail again. fail better.
SUSE LINUX AG - A Novell company    \ 	-- Samuel Beckett