[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ca8eaa40-b422-2272-1fd9-1d0a354c42bf@suse.de>
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2020 07:58:22 +0200
From: Hannes Reinecke <hare@...e.de>
To: Sergei Shtepa <sergei.shtepa@...am.com>
Cc: "axboe@...nel.dk" <axboe@...nel.dk>,
"viro@...iv.linux.org.uk" <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
"hch@...radead.org" <hch@...radead.org>,
"darrick.wong@...cle.com" <darrick.wong@...cle.com>,
"linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org" <linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
"rjw@...ysocki.net" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
"len.brown@...el.com" <len.brown@...el.com>,
"pavel@....cz" <pavel@....cz>,
"akpm@...ux-foundation.org" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
"johannes.thumshirn@....com" <johannes.thumshirn@....com>,
"ming.lei@...hat.com" <ming.lei@...hat.com>,
"jack@...e.cz" <jack@...e.cz>, "tj@...nel.org" <tj@...nel.org>,
"gustavo@...eddedor.com" <gustavo@...eddedor.com>,
"bvanassche@....org" <bvanassche@....org>,
"osandov@...com" <osandov@...com>,
"koct9i@...il.com" <koct9i@...il.com>,
"damien.lemoal@....com" <damien.lemoal@....com>,
"steve@....org" <steve@....org>,
"linux-block@...r.kernel.org" <linux-block@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-pm@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] block layer filter and block device snapshot module
On 10/21/20 4:10 PM, Sergei Shtepa wrote:
> The 10/21/2020 16:31, Hannes Reinecke wrote:
>> I do understand where you are coming from, but then we already have a
>> dm-snap which does exactly what you want to achieve.
>> Of course, that would require a reconfiguration of the storage stack on
>> the machine, which is not always possible (or desired).
>
> Yes, reconfiguring the storage stack on a machine is almost impossible.
>
>>
>> What I _could_ imagine would be a 'dm-intercept' thingie, which
>> redirects the current submit_bio() function for any block device, and
>> re-routes that to a linear device-mapper device pointing back to the
>> original block device.
>>
>> That way you could attach it to basically any block device, _and_ can
>> use the existing device-mapper functionality to do fancy stuff once the
>> submit_io() callback has been re-routed.
>>
>> And it also would help in other scenarios, too; with such a
>> functionality we could seamlessly clone devices without having to move
>> the whole setup to device-mapper first.
>
> Hm...
> Did I understand correctly that the filter itself can be left approximately
> as it is, but the blk-snap module can be replaced with 'dm-intercept',
> which would use the re-route mechanism from the dm?
> I think I may be able to implement it, if you describe your idea in more
> detail.
>
>
Actually, once we have an dm-intercept, why do you need the block-layer
filter at all?
From you initial description the block-layer filter was implemented
such that blk-snap could work; but if we have dm-intercept (and with it
the ability to use device-mapper functionality even for normal block
devices) there wouldn't be any need for the block-layer filter, no?
Cheers,
Hannes
--
Dr. Hannes Reinecke Kernel Storage Architect
hare@...e.de +49 911 74053 688
SUSE Software Solutions GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg
HRB 36809 (AG Nürnberg), Geschäftsführer: Felix Imendörffer
Powered by blists - more mailing lists