Message ID | 1569869810-23848-1-git-send-email-jsimmons@infradead.org (mailing list archive) |
---|---|
Headers | show |
Series | lustre: update to 2.11 support | expand |
On Mon, Sep 30 2019, James Simmons wrote: > This patchset covers 3 areas. The fix 6 patches resolves critical > bugs in the linux client. Mainly for handling of LNet with secondary > IP aliases as well as an RCU issue reported with debugging enabled. > This consoldation of IP handling makes any kernel API changes in the > future easier to handle. > > The last 9 patches cover patches in the lustre-testing that landed > to the OpenSFS branch. > > The rest of the patches cover all the patches missing from the > Lustre 2.11 release. I have done extentsive testing of these > patches (sanity, sanity-pfl, sanity-dom, sanity-pfl). Only > regression I saw was sanity-flr 200 which needs to be investiaged. > So we are in very good shape. Thanks a lot for these James! Though I only received up to 133/151 - are 18 missing, or was there a miscount?? I've applied them on top of my "lustre" branch, then rebased everything in my lustre-testing and lustre-backports (upto about 2.12.2) branches on top of that - and checked that it all compiles. I fixed the issues that I mentioned separately that I found in a few of your patches, and also a couple of issues that I found in some of mine (it is *so* helpful having two people working on this, we can catch each others slip-ups). I've pushed it all to github on a branch "lustre/lustre-XX" because I couldn't think of a good name. I'll review the differences between it and lustre-backport, and then probably rename lustre-XX to lustre-backport - after I find out the story about those missing 18 patches. Thanks, NeilBrown
> > This patchset covers 3 areas. The fix 6 patches resolves critical > > bugs in the linux client. Mainly for handling of LNet with secondary > > IP aliases as well as an RCU issue reported with debugging enabled. > > This consoldation of IP handling makes any kernel API changes in the > > future easier to handle. > > > > The last 9 patches cover patches in the lustre-testing that landed > > to the OpenSFS branch. > > > > The rest of the patches cover all the patches missing from the > > Lustre 2.11 release. I have done extentsive testing of these > > patches (sanity, sanity-pfl, sanity-dom, sanity-pfl). Only > > regression I saw was sanity-flr 200 which needs to be investiaged. > > So we are in very good shape. > > Thanks a lot for these James! > Though I only received up to 133/151 - are 18 missing, or was there a > miscount?? Their should be 151 patches. I have had this problem of patches not making it to my mailbox. That is why I have: https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/lustre-devel/list All the patches are there. > I've applied them on top of my "lustre" branch, then rebased everything > in my lustre-testing and lustre-backports (upto about 2.12.2) branches > on top of that - and checked that it all compiles. > I fixed the issues that I mentioned separately that I found in a few of > your patches, and also a couple of issues that I found in some of mine > (it is *so* helpful having two people working on this, we can catch each > others slip-ups). Yes more eyes are always better :-) Thanks for starting the process!!! > I've pushed it all to github on a branch "lustre/lustre-XX" because I > couldn't think of a good name. > I'll review the differences between it and lustre-backport, and then > probably rename lustre-XX to lustre-backport - after I find out the > story about those missing 18 patches. > > Thanks, > NeilBrown > >
On Tue, Oct 01 2019, James Simmons wrote: >> > This patchset covers 3 areas. The fix 6 patches resolves critical >> > bugs in the linux client. Mainly for handling of LNet with secondary >> > IP aliases as well as an RCU issue reported with debugging enabled. >> > This consoldation of IP handling makes any kernel API changes in the >> > future easier to handle. >> > >> > The last 9 patches cover patches in the lustre-testing that landed >> > to the OpenSFS branch. >> > >> > The rest of the patches cover all the patches missing from the >> > Lustre 2.11 release. I have done extentsive testing of these >> > patches (sanity, sanity-pfl, sanity-dom, sanity-pfl). Only >> > regression I saw was sanity-flr 200 which needs to be investiaged. >> > So we are in very good shape. >> >> Thanks a lot for these James! >> Though I only received up to 133/151 - are 18 missing, or was there a >> miscount?? > > Their should be 151 patches. I have had this problem of patches not making > it to my mailbox. That is why I have: > > https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/lustre-devel/list > > All the patches are there. So they are. There is even a nice "series" line so I can grab them call. I wonder why they didn't get delivered to me ... I've applied them all to my tree with no further issues. I'll push something out later today. Thanks, NeilBrown