[LU-1419] Tracking ticket for gnilnd push Created: 17/May/12 Updated: 19/Dec/12 Resolved: 19/Dec/12 |
|
| Status: | Resolved |
| Project: | Lustre |
| Component/s: | None |
| Affects Version/s: | None |
| Fix Version/s: | Lustre 2.4.0 |
| Type: | New Feature | Priority: | Minor |
| Reporter: | Chris Horn | Assignee: | WC Triage |
| Resolution: | Fixed | Votes: | 0 |
| Labels: | lnet | ||
| Attachments: |
|
| Rank (Obsolete): | 8135 |
| Description |
|
Cray is preparing to submit gnilnd for upstream adoption. This ticket is for tracking that work. |
| Comments |
| Comment by James A Simmons [ 17/May/12 ] |
|
Will this work only be aimed at the master branch? Also during ORNL testing of IR recovery we discovered some old left over code from the catamount days that impacted the recovery time. Should we merge that fix under this ticket? Its just the INITIAL_CONNECT_TIMEOUT in obd_support.h. |
| Comment by Cory Spitz [ 18/May/12 ] |
|
Yes, we'll aim at master. Then, if there is reason to push back, we can do so later. Other changes that aren't related to the gnilnd should be tracked in a different ticket. James, can you open one for the INITIAL_CONNECT_TIMEOUT problem? |
| Comment by James A Simmons [ 18/May/12 ] |
|
The ticket is in http://jira.whamcloud.com/browse/LU-1422 for this. Want to let you know for peer review. Thanks |
| Comment by Cory Spitz [ 11/Jul/12 ] |
|
Our push of gnilnd is eminent. However, it was written before we adopted the retab policy. Can we please submit with the old whitespace style? It would help us from touching every single line or keeping our version and the contributed version different. Thoughts or suggestions? |
| Comment by James A Simmons [ 11/Jul/12 ] |
|
Here is a handy script I used for re-tabbing.After you commit your code just run it and then push it upstream.
|
| Comment by James A Simmons [ 11/Jul/12 ] |
|
Attached to ticket since JIRA managed my script. |
| Comment by Chris Horn [ 11/Jul/12 ] |
| Comment by Doug Oucharek (Inactive) [ 01/Aug/12 ] |
|
Question: What will be Cray's policy for keeping the gnilnd code synchronized between the Lustre main repository and the Cray repository? Will you be doing code drops to match shipping versions? How will changes made by non-Cray community members be handled? |
| Comment by Cory Spitz [ 02/Aug/12 ] |
|
Doug, good question. I don't know exactly, it likely won't be an instantaneous sync. However, Cray won't make code drops to match shipping versions. We intend to keep to the 'master' model. (The version submitted here is already "ahead" of our released versions). Cray will push up changes on as a regular basis as we can manage. Surely, it would be nice to stay current with 'master'. For other contributions, I suggest that we handle those as any other: through Gerrit with community review. |
| Comment by James A Simmons [ 02/Aug/12 ] |
|
Hi Cory. I have been regularly testing master on our Gemini test bed so I have a motivation to keep this driver working |
| Comment by James A Simmons [ 08/Nov/12 ] |
|
I have pushed a updated driver with Isaac suggestions. The driver appears to work pretty well. The only thing I have observed with the driver is that on server node after LNET is brought up it can't ping the MGS until after I first ping the routers. Issac have any idea what could be causing that? |
| Comment by Isaac Huang (Inactive) [ 16/Nov/12 ] |
|
Can you reproduce it? |
| Comment by James A Simmons [ 19/Nov/12 ] |
|
Found the bug in the driver causing this. The latest patch works now. |
| Comment by Peter Jones [ 19/Dec/12 ] |
|
Patch landed for 2.4. I suggest that any subsequent updates are handled under separate tickets for clarity. |