[LU-5465] Enhancements to Lustre DKMS RPM

• Type: Bug
• Resolution: Fixed
• Priority: Minor
• Fix Version/s: Lustre 2.8.0
• Severity: 3
• Assignee: Bruno Faccini (Inactive)
• Reporter: Bruno Faccini (Inactive)

Description

This ticket is used to track enhancements that appear to be required during Lustre DKMS RPM build/testing integration in our build/tests infrastructures

This is a follow-on to LU-1032 main ticket that introduced DKMS usage/need for Lustre.

Issue Links

• is related to: LU-6062 lustre-initialization-1: mount.lustre: mount lustre-mdt1/mdt1 at /mnt/mds1 failed: No such device
• is related to: LU-1032 Add dkms support for kernel modules

Comments

[Bruno Faccini (Inactive)]

Oops, you are right, I have been to quick on this ... Will re-close LU-5104 and work on this in LU-4606!

[Brian Murrell (Inactive)]

bfaccini: Are you sure about that? Change 10654 only wraps the:

%{_libdir}/@PACKAGE@/mount_osd_ldiskfs.so

that's already in the osd-ldiskfs with a:

%if %{with lustre_utils}
...
%endif

mount_osd_ldiskfs.so seems to have actually been added to the osd-ldiskfs package by LU-4606 in change 10193 from what I can see.

Maybe what needs to happen here is that lustre-osd-ldiskfs needs to be split into lustre-osd-ldiskfs and kmod-osd-ldiskfs (and of course the same for the ZFS osd module). Then lustre-dkms can provide/conflicts the kmod-osd zfs and ldiskfs packages and the lustre-osd zfs and ldiskfs packages can continue to provide the userspace hooks.

[Bruno Faccini (Inactive)]

I have re-opened LU-5104 to point to this functionality/compatibility problem between both tickets/changes.

[Bruno Faccini (Inactive)]

Brian: I was not aware of the fact that mount_osd_[zfs,ldiskfs].so libs are now part of lustre-osd-[zfs,ldiskfs] RPMs, but this seems to come from a recently integrated fix (Gerrit Change #10654, with commit adf2e9d9ab987b46fa0269038f348cf2a17fd0e0, for LU-5104). In fact, I don't know presently how we can fix this, because of LU-2391 osd_[zfs,ldiskfs].ko have been packaged in their own RPMs, and at that time they were not expected to contain something else than back-end specific Kernel modules ...

[Brian Murrell (Inactive)]

bfaccini: With http://review.whamcloud.com/11776, shouldn't the osd_zfs.ko module also be removed from the lustre-osd-zfs RPM? Is that being tracked somewhere else?

[Bruno Faccini (Inactive)]

2nd patch is at http://review.whamcloud.com/11776, to strengthen Lustre DKMS RPM install vs legacy lustre-osd and lustre-modules RPMs already installed, with more Provides/Conflicts statements spec file.

[Bruno Faccini (Inactive)]

1st patch is at http://review.whamcloud.com/11381, to address case where SPL/ZFS have only been "added" (vs "build" and/or "install") in DKMS terminology and be able to dynamically find their respective version anyway in Lustre DKMS RPM dkms.conf script. This should strengthen Lustre DKMS install and automatic build.