On Oct 10, 2008 22:06 -0500, Troy Benjegerdes wrote: > All this effort in packaging and QA problems seems to kinda be something > that would just go away with a patchless server though. Which I think > leads back to having good documentation on what each patch in the set is > for, and what issues it has in getting merged into upstream kernel.org.
Whether the kernel is patched or not is almost irrelevant to the testing of Lustre. Yes, it's true that there are sometimes bugs in our kernel patches, but I don't think that makes up an significant portion of our testing efforts. As for a patchless kernel, I recently did an analysis of our server patches, and it seems possible that we could remove kernel patches with Lustre 2.0 if development effort is put in that direction. As yet, this hasn't been a priority from any of our customers, so it by necessity takes a back seat to implementing other features they are interested in. That doesn't mean it won't happen, but rather on an "as possible" basis. Cheers, Andreas -- Andreas Dilger Sr. Staff Engineer, Lustre Group Sun Microsystems of Canada, Inc. _______________________________________________ Lustre-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.lustre.org/mailman/listinfo/lustre-discuss
