[Lustre-devel] [wc-discuss] Important changes to libcfs primitives usage.

Dilger, Andreas andreas.dilger at intel.com
Sat Dec 15 01:12:16 PST 2012

On 2012-12-14, at 23:28, "Alexey Lyahkov" <alexey_lyashkov at xyratex.com> wrote:
> you may confirm any platfrom isn't intersect with linux names for that ?
> I not sure. cfs_ prefix introduce a private namespace which may implemented at any way 
> I remember that discussion in LUG, but we have a decision to continue discussion about it, but you are stop discussion and make changes without it.

I don't think it is fair to say there was no discussion. It was discussed at LUG and SC Lustre BOF and on the list. 

While I would be thrilled if there was a native MacOS and Windows client for Lustre, realistically there is nothing today.  The MacOS client is not maintained, and the Windows client is stick inside Oracle.

In contrast, only the Linux client is on use today, so it makes sense to focus effort on this instead of spending time on maintaining portability code that is not useful to us.

If the other clients were usable, perhaps a different decision would be made. 

> I'm strongly about it.
> I remember you idea about landing lustre client in kernel tree but that may introduce hard problem with supporting stable code, so we need to discuss and find way - how we will have and support a stable code in opposite to development version in kernel tree.

Yes, there are potential issues and effort with putting the client into the kernel, but also benefits as well. Faster support for new kernels, less effort spent to catch up to new changes in the kernel, better distro support. 

> I strongly against to do it without discussion with all affected persons and companies.

I'm open for discussion. You've voiced some objection to this plan, so please explain the benefits of not cleaning up old code from Lustre, not removing useless abstractions, and npt putting the client into the kernel. 

Cheers, Andreas

> On Dec 14, 2012, at 13:52, Peng, Tao wrote:
>> Hi Alex,
>> We are not killing the portability code. For now we just wanted to replace it with Linux defined symbols, to a extent that libcfs is unnecessary for Linux client. The libcfs layer remains for platforms that need porting. They just need to define things with Linux names rather than current cfs_ prefix. I admit that some ported code may get broken in during the transition but in theory it is easy to fix them when interests raise on other platforms.
>> Cheers,
>> Tao
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: lustre-devel-bounces at lists.lustre.org [mailto:lustre-devel-bounces at lists.lustre.org] On Behalf
>>> Of Alexey Lyahkov
>>> Sent: Friday, December 14, 2012 4:19 PM
>>> To: Oleg Drokin
>>> Cc: wc-discuss Discussion; lustre-devel at lists.lustre.org Development
>>> Subject: Re: [Lustre-devel] [wc-discuss] Important changes to libcfs primitives usage.
>>> Please don't kill a portability code.
>>> We have spend many times in past to introduce it's but now you want to kill that work and make
>>> portable to systems other then Linux too hard.
>>> That is wrong way as supporting a compatibility code have no cost.
>>> On Dec 5, 2012, at 17:54, Oleg Drokin wrote:
>>>> Hello!
>>>> I just landed first patch of the series to reduce usage of our libcfs_ wrappers for kernel
>>> primitives like libcfs_spin_lock/unlock...
>>>> You can see actual change here: http://review.whamcloud.com/#change,2829
>>>> It's highly likely that plenty of patches will be affected. To make our job easier, there is a
>>>> build/libcfs_cleanup.sed script included, you can run it on all your .c and .h files to make
>>> necessary replacements:
>>>> sed -i -f build/libcfs_cleanup.sed3  `find . -name "*.h" -or -name "*.c"`
>>>> Please be also advised that there are more changes like this are coming (timeline is not very
>>> clear ATM, we might be able to wait with the rest until
>>>> after feature freeze) and the sed script will be updated accordingly.
>>>> Bye,
>>>>  Oleg
>>>> --
>>>> Oleg Drokin
>>>> Senior Software Engineer
>>>> Whamcloud, Inc.
>>> ----------------------------------------------
>>> Alexey Lyahkov
>>> alexey_lyashkov at xyratex.com
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Lustre-devel mailing list
>>> Lustre-devel at lists.lustre.org
>>> http://lists.lustre.org/mailman/listinfo/lustre-devel
> ----------------------------------------------
> Alexey Lyahkov
> alexey_lyashkov at xyratex.com
> _______________________________________________
> Lustre-devel mailing list
> Lustre-devel at lists.lustre.org
> http://lists.lustre.org/mailman/listinfo/lustre-devel

More information about the lustre-devel mailing list