Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.debian.kernel > #82453 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Thomas Goirand <zigo@debian.org> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2024-05-17 12:40 +0200 |
| Last post | 2024-05-17 18:20 +0200 |
| Articles | 4 — 3 participants |
Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.kernel
ocfs2_dlmfs missing from the cloud kernel Thomas Goirand <zigo@debian.org> - 2024-05-17 12:40 +0200
Re: ocfs2_dlmfs missing from the cloud kernel Bastian Blank <waldi@debian.org> - 2024-05-17 13:10 +0200
Re: ocfs2_dlmfs missing from the cloud kernel Bastian Blank <waldi@debian.org> - 2024-05-17 18:00 +0200
Re: ocfs2_dlmfs missing from the cloud kernel Noah Meyerhans <noahm@debian.org> - 2024-05-17 18:20 +0200
| From | Thomas Goirand <zigo@debian.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-05-17 12:40 +0200 |
| Subject | ocfs2_dlmfs missing from the cloud kernel |
| Message-ID | <IF3ai-dWjE-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
Hi, The module ocfs2_dlmfs may be use to have a filesystem shared with 2 VMs (using for example OpenStack Cinder multi-attach). It's there in Ubuntu, in the "normal" kernel, but not in the Debian cloud kernel. Would it be possible to *not* strip-down this module in the cloud kernel please ? In the source package of the kernel, I can read in: debian/config/config.cloud: ## file: fs/ocfs2/Kconfig ## # CONFIG_OCFS2_FS is not set how do I change this? Cheers, Thomas Goirand (zigo)
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bastian Blank <waldi@debian.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-05-17 13:10 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <IF3Dj-dWK9-3@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #82453 |
On Fri, May 17, 2024 at 12:31:51PM +0200, Thomas Goirand wrote: > how do I change this? You install the non-cloud kernel. Bastian -- Those who hate and fight must stop themselves -- otherwise it is not stopped. -- Spock, "Day of the Dove", stardate unknown
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bastian Blank <waldi@debian.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-05-17 18:00 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <IF89Y-dZhm-7@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #82454 |
On Fri, May 17, 2024 at 12:44:32PM +0200, Bastian Blank wrote: > On Fri, May 17, 2024 at 12:31:51PM +0200, Thomas Goirand wrote: > > how do I change this? > You install the non-cloud kernel. The cloud kernel is limited in scope. And the decision was that not everything you can do on platforms is in scope. So you can open a bug report, but for now I would say it is not in this scope. Cloud platforms tend to provide such things and you don't define them on your own. Bastian -- It would seem that evil retreats when forcibly confronted. -- Yarnek of Excalbia, "The Savage Curtain", stardate 5906.5
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Noah Meyerhans <noahm@debian.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-05-17 18:20 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <IF8tj-dZDe-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #82464 |
On Fri, May 17, 2024 at 05:34:57PM +0200, Bastian Blank wrote: > > > how do I change this? > > You install the non-cloud kernel. > > The cloud kernel is limited in scope. And the decision was that not > everything you can do on platforms is in scope. To clarify the scope a bit, historically the cloud kernels have specifically targeted Amazon EC2 and Microsoft Azure. The rationale for this is that these providers present a consistent and reasonably well defined device model, meaning we can be sure what drivers and other kernel features are needed and which we can leave out. It is not intended to be usable on every cloud service. The module in question, ocfs2_dlmfs, is not, to my knowledge, generally useful in the cloud environments targeted by the cloud kernel. If we had the resources, it'd be great provide further optimized kernel builds, e.g. one for EC2 specifically, Azure specifically, GCP, and maybe some sort of OpenStack/QEMU VM definition. Unfortunately, we do not currently have those resources. So, IMO, a wishlist bug against src:linux asking for another build configuration would be a reasonable way to record an interest in such a change. The kernel team may be able to provide more context on which specific resources would be needed in order to support this. Maybe in the future it'll get implemented. noah
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.kernel
csiph-web