Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.kernel > #1307516 > unrolled thread

Re: [PATCH] BTT: Change nd_btt_arena_is_valid() to verify UUID

Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: [PATCH] BTT: Change nd_btt_arena_is_valid() to verify UUID Toshi Kani <toshi.kani@hpe.com> - 2016-01-12 16:10 +0100
    Re: [PATCH] BTT: Change nd_btt_arena_is_valid() to verify UUID Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com> - 2016-01-12 17:40 +0100
      Re: [PATCH] BTT: Change nd_btt_arena_is_valid() to verify UUID Linda Knippers <linda.knippers@hpe.com> - 2016-01-12 17:50 +0100
        Re: [PATCH] BTT: Change nd_btt_arena_is_valid() to verify UUID Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com> - 2016-01-12 18:00 +0100

#1307516 — Re: [PATCH] BTT: Change nd_btt_arena_is_valid() to verify UUID

On Fri, 2015-12-18 at 14:23 -0800, Dan Williams wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 10:52 AM, Toshi Kani <toshi.kani@hpe.com> wrote:
> > On Fri, 2015-12-18 at 09:54 -0800, Dan Williams wrote:
> > > On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 7:15 AM, Toshi Kani <toshi.kani@hpe.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > > On Fri, 2015-12-18 at 01:34 -0700, Vishal Verma wrote:
> > > > > Also, I wonder if this problem is solved by using libndctl to
> > > > > manage
> > > > > BTTs.
> > > > 
> > > > I have not tested with libndctl yet, but I think our bind/unbind
> > > > scripts do the same procedures.
> > > 
> > > We loop through all combinations of sector size in our unit test.  If
> > > you want to change the sector size the expectation is that the
> > > namespace is destroyed and fully re-created, especially due to the
> > > fact that changing sector size invalidates all data on the namespace.
> > > 
> > > See: https://github.com/pmem/ndctl/blob/master/lib/test-libndctl.c
> > 
> > The parent_uuid is not set on our NVDIMM-N systems.  I do not see 
> > 'uuid' file under sysfs 'namespaceX.X' per namespace_visible(), either.
> > This concept of creating/destroying a namespace is a bit foreign to us
> > since we've never needed to do.  Can you elaborate how it's supposed to
> > work for NVDIMM-N?
> > 
> 
> Ugh, yes.  An oversight on my part, let me give this some thought.
> Whatever we decide, I want the libndctl api to be identical for the
> two cases.
> 
> I expect the simplest option is to have
> ndctl_namespace_disable_invalidate() destroy the btt-info block in the
> NVDIMM-N case.

Do you have any update on this?  If we are going to use ndctl to address
this issue, does it mean that we will have to use ndctl to manage BTT?

Thanks,
-Toshi

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#1307612

On Tue, Jan 12, 2016 at 7:02 AM, Toshi Kani <toshi.kani@hpe.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 2015-12-18 at 14:23 -0800, Dan Williams wrote:
>> On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 10:52 AM, Toshi Kani <toshi.kani@hpe.com> wrote:
>> > On Fri, 2015-12-18 at 09:54 -0800, Dan Williams wrote:
>> > > On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 7:15 AM, Toshi Kani <toshi.kani@hpe.com>
>> > > wrote:
>> > > > On Fri, 2015-12-18 at 01:34 -0700, Vishal Verma wrote:
>> > > > > Also, I wonder if this problem is solved by using libndctl to
>> > > > > manage
>> > > > > BTTs.
>> > > >
>> > > > I have not tested with libndctl yet, but I think our bind/unbind
>> > > > scripts do the same procedures.
>> > >
>> > > We loop through all combinations of sector size in our unit test.  If
>> > > you want to change the sector size the expectation is that the
>> > > namespace is destroyed and fully re-created, especially due to the
>> > > fact that changing sector size invalidates all data on the namespace.
>> > >
>> > > See: https://github.com/pmem/ndctl/blob/master/lib/test-libndctl.c
>> >
>> > The parent_uuid is not set on our NVDIMM-N systems.  I do not see
>> > 'uuid' file under sysfs 'namespaceX.X' per namespace_visible(), either.
>> > This concept of creating/destroying a namespace is a bit foreign to us
>> > since we've never needed to do.  Can you elaborate how it's supposed to
>> > work for NVDIMM-N?
>> >
>>
>> Ugh, yes.  An oversight on my part, let me give this some thought.
>> Whatever we decide, I want the libndctl api to be identical for the
>> two cases.
>>
>> I expect the simplest option is to have
>> ndctl_namespace_disable_invalidate() destroy the btt-info block in the
>> NVDIMM-N case.
>
> Do you have any update on this?  If we are going to use ndctl to address
> this issue, does it mean that we will have to use ndctl to manage BTT?

This is my current proposal:

https://github.com/pmem/ndctl/blob/pending/Documentation/ndctl-create-namespace.txt

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1307618

On 1/12/2016 11:38 AM, Dan Williams wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 12, 2016 at 7:02 AM, Toshi Kani <toshi.kani@hpe.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, 2015-12-18 at 14:23 -0800, Dan Williams wrote:
>>> On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 10:52 AM, Toshi Kani <toshi.kani@hpe.com> wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 2015-12-18 at 09:54 -0800, Dan Williams wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 7:15 AM, Toshi Kani <toshi.kani@hpe.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> On Fri, 2015-12-18 at 01:34 -0700, Vishal Verma wrote:
>>>>>>> Also, I wonder if this problem is solved by using libndctl to
>>>>>>> manage
>>>>>>> BTTs.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I have not tested with libndctl yet, but I think our bind/unbind
>>>>>> scripts do the same procedures.
>>>>>
>>>>> We loop through all combinations of sector size in our unit test.  If
>>>>> you want to change the sector size the expectation is that the
>>>>> namespace is destroyed and fully re-created, especially due to the
>>>>> fact that changing sector size invalidates all data on the namespace.
>>>>>
>>>>> See: https://github.com/pmem/ndctl/blob/master/lib/test-libndctl.c
>>>>
>>>> The parent_uuid is not set on our NVDIMM-N systems.  I do not see
>>>> 'uuid' file under sysfs 'namespaceX.X' per namespace_visible(), either.
>>>> This concept of creating/destroying a namespace is a bit foreign to us
>>>> since we've never needed to do.  Can you elaborate how it's supposed to
>>>> work for NVDIMM-N?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Ugh, yes.  An oversight on my part, let me give this some thought.
>>> Whatever we decide, I want the libndctl api to be identical for the
>>> two cases.
>>>
>>> I expect the simplest option is to have
>>> ndctl_namespace_disable_invalidate() destroy the btt-info block in the
>>> NVDIMM-N case.
>>
>> Do you have any update on this?  If we are going to use ndctl to address
>> this issue, does it mean that we will have to use ndctl to manage BTT?
> 
> This is my current proposal:
> 
> https://github.com/pmem/ndctl/blob/pending/Documentation/ndctl-create-namespace.txt

I don't really like "safe" as a mode choice.  The others are "memory" and "raw".
Could the one using the BTT be "sector" or "atomic" or "btt" or something other
than "safe"?  Using "safe" implies that the others aren't safe, but they are if
you use them for their intended purpose and know what you're doing.

-- ljk

> _______________________________________________
> Linux-nvdimm mailing list
> Linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org
> https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-nvdimm
> 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1307635

On Tue, Jan 12, 2016 at 8:47 AM, Linda Knippers <linda.knippers@hpe.com> wrote:
> On 1/12/2016 11:38 AM, Dan Williams wrote:
>> On Tue, Jan 12, 2016 at 7:02 AM, Toshi Kani <toshi.kani@hpe.com> wrote:
>>> On Fri, 2015-12-18 at 14:23 -0800, Dan Williams wrote:
>>>> On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 10:52 AM, Toshi Kani <toshi.kani@hpe.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, 2015-12-18 at 09:54 -0800, Dan Williams wrote:
>>>>>> On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 7:15 AM, Toshi Kani <toshi.kani@hpe.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> On Fri, 2015-12-18 at 01:34 -0700, Vishal Verma wrote:
>>>>>>>> Also, I wonder if this problem is solved by using libndctl to
>>>>>>>> manage
>>>>>>>> BTTs.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I have not tested with libndctl yet, but I think our bind/unbind
>>>>>>> scripts do the same procedures.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We loop through all combinations of sector size in our unit test.  If
>>>>>> you want to change the sector size the expectation is that the
>>>>>> namespace is destroyed and fully re-created, especially due to the
>>>>>> fact that changing sector size invalidates all data on the namespace.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> See: https://github.com/pmem/ndctl/blob/master/lib/test-libndctl.c
>>>>>
>>>>> The parent_uuid is not set on our NVDIMM-N systems.  I do not see
>>>>> 'uuid' file under sysfs 'namespaceX.X' per namespace_visible(), either.
>>>>> This concept of creating/destroying a namespace is a bit foreign to us
>>>>> since we've never needed to do.  Can you elaborate how it's supposed to
>>>>> work for NVDIMM-N?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Ugh, yes.  An oversight on my part, let me give this some thought.
>>>> Whatever we decide, I want the libndctl api to be identical for the
>>>> two cases.
>>>>
>>>> I expect the simplest option is to have
>>>> ndctl_namespace_disable_invalidate() destroy the btt-info block in the
>>>> NVDIMM-N case.
>>>
>>> Do you have any update on this?  If we are going to use ndctl to address
>>> this issue, does it mean that we will have to use ndctl to manage BTT?
>>
>> This is my current proposal:
>>
>> https://github.com/pmem/ndctl/blob/pending/Documentation/ndctl-create-namespace.txt
>
> I don't really like "safe" as a mode choice.  The others are "memory" and "raw".
> Could the one using the BTT be "sector" or "atomic" or "btt" or something other
> than "safe"?  Using "safe" implies that the others aren't safe, but they are if
> you use them for their intended purpose and know what you're doing.

Of those alternatives I think "sector" mode is the most clear.

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel

csiph-web