[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <29ACF5A8-7608-46BB-8191-E3FEB77D0F24@cray.com>
Date: Fri, 1 Jun 2018 18:25:24 +0000
From: Doug Oucharek <doucharek@...y.com>
To: Andreas Dilger <adilger@...ger.ca>
CC: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
"devel@...verdev.osuosl.org" <devel@...verdev.osuosl.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Oleg Drokin <oleg.drokin@...el.com>,
"selinux@...ho.nsa.gov" <selinux@...ho.nsa.gov>,
fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
lustre-devel <lustre-devel@...ts.lustre.org>
Subject: Re: [lustre-devel] [PATCH] staging: lustre: delete the filesystem
from the tree.
Would it makes sense to land LNet and LNDs on their own first? Get the networking house in order first before layering on the file system?
Doug
> On Jun 1, 2018, at 11:20 AM, Andreas Dilger <adilger@...ger.ca> wrote:
>
> On Jun 1, 2018, at 7:41 AM, Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org> wrote:
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> all that churn without much visible progress to a mergeable codebase
>> was really ennoying.
>>
>> I'd recommend if people want to merge lustre they start with a managable
>> subset first, e.g. the fs client code with simple IP-only networking.
>
> Adding or removing the IB networking makes basically no difference to the
> code size. This would also make the client much less useful, since a large
> number of sites use Lustre with IB networks.
>
> Cheers, Andreas
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> lustre-devel mailing list
> lustre-devel@...ts.lustre.org
> http://lists.lustre.org/listinfo.cgi/lustre-devel-lustre.org
Powered by blists - more mailing lists