[Lustre-discuss] Patchless kernel support?

[Peter Jones]

Ashley

You are correct. Andreas has outlined the work that is required in bz 21524

Peter

Ashley Pittman wrote:
> On 25 Nov 2010, at 14:04, Alexey Lyashkov wrote:
>
>   
>> Ashley,
>>
>> I don't clearry understand what you want, if you say about patchless support on client -
>> typical size of adding support of one new kernel to pachless client is ~40kb of patch for lustre.
>> Sometimes is has more work, sometimes less.
>> As last lustre supported kernel is 2.6.32 - you should be plan to have ~150kb patch for 2.6.37 kernel support.
>>     
>
> I hadn't realise it was this much work for tracking client versions!
>
>   
>> if you say about patchless kernel support - yes, that is possible, but that is need more work and submiting lots patches in kernel upstream.
>>     
>
> Yes this is what I meant, patchless kernel support.  It was mentioned at SC that this might be possible and I was looking for more information on the type of changes and scale of work which would be involved to do this.  There was the suggestion made that Lustre was originally written against much older kernels and that given increased functionality exported in modern kernels it would be possible to reduce or perhaps even eliminate the kernel patches entirely and my question was asking if anybody has done a feasibility study into this and if so would they be willing to publish the conclusions.
>
> Ashley,
> _______________________________________________
> Lustre-discuss mailing list
> Lustre-discuss at lists.lustre.org
> http://lists.lustre.org/mailman/listinfo/lustre-discuss
>
>