[LU-2158] remove lvfs and fsfilt code

• Type: Improvement
• Resolution: Fixed
• Priority: Minor
• Fix Version/s: Lustre 2.6.0
• Affects Version/s: Lustre 2.4.0, Lustre 2.5.0
• Labels: patch
• Story Points: 3
• Severity: 3
• Assignee: Keith Mannthey (Inactive)
• Reporter: Andreas Dilger

Description

With the fixes to MGS, MDS, and OFD, there should no longer be a need to keep the fsfilt and lvfs infrastructure. Any use of that code should be considered a bug, since it means Lustre is not using the OSD API properly. Any remaining use of fsfilt_ldiskfs can be moved directly into the osd-ldiskfs module.

Issue Links

• is related to: LU-4951 DKMS RPM no longer works due to referencing removed modules in its current configuration
• is related to: LU-3232 fsfilt_ldiskfs.ko should be in osd-ldiskfs rpm
• is related to: LU-3961 lustre/lvfs/fsfilt-ldiskfs.c: No such file or directory
• is related to: LU-2059 mgc to backup configuration on osd-based llogs

Comments

[Peter Jones]

Landed for 2.6

[James A Simmons]

The last patch has landed. This ticket can be closed.

[James A Simmons]

Thank you. Will test.

[Mikhail Pershin]

James, I've just updated patch to resolve new conflicts.

[James A Simmons]

Only patch http://review.whamcloud.com/#/c/5512 is left

[James A Simmons]

Patches needed to complete this ticket are:

http://review.whamcloud.com/#/c/5331
http://review.whamcloud.com/#/c/5512

[James A Simmons]

With only three months to import the OSD api it is amazing how much did make it in. I have learned if you want a major feature you have to plan on merging over several releases. From what I'm seeing a lot of new work is ready to go as soon as the flood gates for 2.5 are open which is a good thing.

[Christopher Morrone (Inactive)]

Would such a patch be accepted for 2.4.1 is the bigger question?

While I am quite disappointed that 2.4.0 is going to be released with this unfinished, I would personally argue that the maintenance branch is not the place for this kind of code movement. So I would propose that be added to the 2.5 plan (i.e., change "Fix Version/s" to Lustre 2.5.0).

[Alex Zhuravlev]

oh, this is MGC.. sorry for confusion

[James A Simmons]

The MGS backup logs still need the lvfs layer (LU-2059). Also the push_ctx and pop_ctx code in the lvfs layer is used by ptlrpc_sec.c. So the lvfs layer is still needed. As for the fsfilt layer that could be integrated into the osd-ldiskfs layer as I did in http://review.whamcloud.com/#change,5512. Have to make sure its safe for 2.4. Would such a patch be accepted for 2.4.1 is the bigger question?