From: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.de>
To: lustre-devel@lists.lustre.org
Subject: [lustre-devel] Lustre upstreaming status.
Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2019 16:31:24 +1100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87sglgg9ub.fsf@notabene.neil.brown.name> (raw)
In-Reply-To: alpine.LFD.2.21.1802112308150.3291@casper.infradead.org
Hi all,
At the LUG in Houston, I said that I hoped to submit something upstream
by the end of 2019. Clearly that isn't going to happen now.
The main reason that caused me to not even try is IPv6 support.
It became apparent to me that LNet would not be accepted until it has
working IPv6 support, and that doesn't exist yet.
I hope to put some development time into IPv6, and to have something
that works and is worth reviewing by the end of January 2020.
The other issue is that development has progressed slowly because
there is no spare review bandwidth. James has contributed a lot, and
others have helped, but reviewing patches for two code streams (OpenSFS
and Linux-upstream) turns out to be too much to ask for.
So I've decided to take a different approach. From now on I'm not
going to wait for reviews for patches going into my linux-lustre tree.
Part of my justification for this is that historically, review hasn't
really provided much promise of correctness. Patches go missing.
Random lines from patches go missing. Errors creep in in other ways.
Instead, I am developing a tool which will compare OpenSFS lustre
and Linux-lustre and report relevant differences. I have a prototype
working, and it is helping me to find missing patches and parts of
patches in both trees.
I will continue to submit patches to gerrit to bring OpenSFS closer to
my linux tree when that is needed, and will apply patches from OpenSFS
to my tree without extra review when that it needed.
When the time comes to submit upstream, I plan to present the tool so
that other developers can confirm that what I am submitting is
functionally equivalent to OpenSFS, and so that we can ensure the
equivalence remains.
Consequently my "lustre" branch will jump forward to v5.4 soon,
probably tomorrow, and will remain close to mainline.
I will also be growing my list of outstanding OpenSFS patches
(currently about 100, many of which haven't been submitted to gerrit
yet) and will hope to get those reviewed. Any changes that result from
the review will be detected by my comparison script when the patch
lands, and I'll update linux-lustre to match.
My new goal for upstream submission is the end of Q1-2020. This is
probably a bit optimistic, but gives me a suitable focus.
NeilBrown
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 832 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.lustre.org/pipermail/lustre-devel-lustre.org/attachments/20191219/c48e850c/attachment.sig>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-12-19 5:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-02-11 23:17 [lustre-devel] Lustre upstream client TODO list James Simmons
2018-02-11 23:54 ` NeilBrown
2018-02-12 1:15 ` Patrick Farrell
2018-02-12 2:09 ` NeilBrown
2018-03-22 23:21 ` [lustre-devel] Current results and status of my upstream work James Simmons
2018-03-27 5:32 ` NeilBrown
2018-03-27 6:17 ` Dilger, Andreas
2018-03-27 21:17 ` Jinshan Xiong
2018-03-27 21:58 ` NeilBrown
2018-03-30 18:55 ` James Simmons
2018-03-31 5:47 ` NeilBrown
2019-12-19 5:31 ` NeilBrown [this message]
2019-12-27 16:04 ` [lustre-devel] Lustre upstreaming status Degremont, Aurelien
2020-01-07 0:02 ` James Simmons
2020-01-07 1:53 ` Andreas Dilger
2020-01-07 2:24 ` Andreas Dilger
2020-01-07 4:32 ` NeilBrown
2020-01-07 4:05 ` NeilBrown
2020-01-08 21:18 ` NeilBrown
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=87sglgg9ub.fsf@notabene.neil.brown.name \
--to=neilb@suse.de \
--cc=lustre-devel@lists.lustre.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 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).