From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============8513525780482925993=="
MIME-Version: 1.0
From: Harris, James R <james.r.harris at intel.com>
Subject: Re: [SPDK] RPC Naming
Date: Thu, 09 May 2019 15:47:11 +0000
Message-ID: <08FE1D59-F385-4D2E-8048-DEF5FF9192A5@intel.com>
List-ID: <spdk@lists.01.org>
To: spdk@lists.01.org

--===============8513525780482925993==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

My intention is that the old names could stick around for years if necessar=
y.  But we will want to update the Cinder driver at some point to use the n=
ew names.

-Jim


=EF=BB=BFOn 5/9/19, 7:03 AM, "SPDK on behalf of Szwed, Maciej" <spdk-bounce=
s(a)lists.01.org on behalf of maciej.szwed(a)intel.com> wrote:

    Hi Jim,
    "We could keep the old names around as aliases for as long as needed." =
- that might be very long. For example: Cinder driver uses RPC calls and ch=
aning it in this driver may cause that some older user setups may stop work=
ing. We have to be very careful about such changes - I'm sure you are aware=
 of that, but I just wanted point that in case somebody else may have simil=
ar situation but not be fully aware.
    =

    Maciek
    =

    -----Original Message-----
    From: SPDK [mailto:spdk-bounces(a)lists.01.org] On Behalf Of Harris, Ja=
mes R
    Sent: Wednesday, May 8, 2019 1:10 AM
    To: Storage Performance Development Kit <spdk(a)lists.01.org>
    Subject: [SPDK] RPC Naming
    =

    There has been quite a bit of chatter recently about the SPDK RPCs =E2=
=80=93 lack of meaningful error codes in a lot of the RPCs, and at least on=
e RPC returning data in an array with different =E2=80=9Ctypes=E2=80=9D.  A=
nother sore point is the naming of the RPCs themselves.
    =

    =

      1.  construct v. create (the vast majority use =E2=80=9Cconstruct=E2=
=80=9D)
      2.  destruct v. delete v. destroy (the vast majority use =E2=80=9Cdel=
ete=E2=80=9D)
      3.  most contain their associated component name in the RPC names, bu=
t some of the oldest ones from iscsi do not
      4.  most do not follow a noun_verb(_object) naming convention
      5.  minor nits like =E2=80=9Cconstruct_nvme_bdev=E2=80=9D =E2=80=93 t=
his really attaches an nvme controller, which then creates bdevs for each n=
amespace (there could be many)
    =

    I=E2=80=99ve put out a patch series (https://review.gerrithub.io/c/spdk=
/spdk/+/453036) with suggested names for all of our existing RPCs =E2=80=93=
 there are almost 150 of them now.  All of the old names would still be val=
id, but deprecated.  We could keep the old names around as aliases for as l=
ong as needed.
    =

    The patch series has an example of how the get_rpc_methods RPC would be=
 converted to rpc_get_methods, and converts the previously deprecated get/s=
et/clear_trace_flag RPCs to use this new framework.  Thanks to Ben Walker f=
or his help on making some of the Python infrastructure for this simpler th=
an I originally coded it.
    =

    If you have an interest in the SPDK RPC API, please take some time and =
review this patch set.
    =

    Thanks,
    =

    -Jim
    =

    _______________________________________________
    SPDK mailing list
    SPDK(a)lists.01.org
    https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/spdk
    _______________________________________________
    SPDK mailing list
    SPDK(a)lists.01.org
    https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/spdk
    =



--===============8513525780482925993==--