Return-Path: Received: from mail-bl2nam02on0104.outbound.protection.outlook.com ([104.47.38.104]:55749 "EHLO NAM02-BL2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753293AbdDRRG3 (ORCPT ); Tue, 18 Apr 2017 13:06:29 -0400 From: "Chandy, John" To: Boaz Harrosh CC: Christoph Hellwig , "martin.petersen@oracle.com" , "trond.myklebust@primarydata.com" , "axboe@kernel.dk" , "osd-dev@open-osd.org" , "linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-block@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: RFC: drop the T10 OSD code and its users Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2017 17:06:25 +0000 Message-ID: <1F41407D-B78F-46E3-8FBE-90A5B1E5C3DE@uconn.edu> References: <20170412160109.10598-1-hch@lst.de> <13c543db-dd38-1825-a58d-b4dff99e5f3c@electrozaur.com> In-Reply-To: <13c543db-dd38-1825-a58d-b4dff99e5f3c@electrozaur.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: As one of those academics that Boaz was talking about, we do use the OSD dr= iver for various research projects including support for OSD in parallel fi= le systems like OrangeFS and Lustre. John. > On Apr 18, 2017, at 12:24 PM, Boaz Harrosh wrote: >=20 > On 04/12/2017 07:01 PM, Christoph Hellwig wrote: >=20 > Hi Sir Christoph >=20 >> The only real user of the T10 OSD protocol, the pNFS object layout >> driver never went to the point of having shipping products, and the >> other two users (osdblk and exofs) were simple example of it's usage. >>=20 >=20 > I understand why osdblk might be a pain, and was broken from day one, and > should by all means go away ASAP. >=20 > But exofs should not be bothering anyone, and as far as I know does > not use any special API's except the osd_uld code of course. >=20 >> The code has been mostly unmaintained for years and is getting in the >> way of block / SCSI changes, so I think it's finally time to drop it. >>=20 >=20 > Please tell me what are those changes you are talking about? I might be > able to help in conversion. I guess you mean osd_uld and the Upper SCSI A= PI. > Just point me at a tree where osd_uld is broken, and perhaps with a littl= e > guidance from you I can do a satisfactory conversion. >=20 > Is true that no new code went in for a long while, but I still from time > to time run a setup and test that the all stack, like iscsi-bidi and so o= n still > works. >=20 > That said, yes only a stand alone exofs was tested for a long time, a ful= l > pnfs setup is missing any supporting server. So Yes I admit that pnfs-obj= is > getting very rotten. And is most probably broken, on the pnfs side of thi= ngs. > [Which I admit makes my little plea kind of mute ;-) ] >=20 > Every once in a while I get emails from Students basing all kind of inter= esting > experiments on top of the exofs and object base storage. So for the sake = of academics > and for the sake of a true bidi-stack testing, might we want to evaluate = what is the > up coming cost, and what is a minimum set we are willing to keep? >=20 > Please advise? >=20 > thanks > Boaz >=20 >> These patches are against Jens' block for-next tree as that already >> has various modifications of the SCSI code. >>=20 >=20 > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html