Re: [Clusters_sig] RE: [Linux-cluster] Re: [Ocfs2-devel] [RFC] nodemanager, ocfs2, dlm

2005-07-21 Thread Lars Marowsky-Bree
On 2005-07-20T11:39:38, Joel Becker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>   In turn, let me clarify a little where configfs fits in to
> things.  Configfs is merely a convenient and transparent method to
> communicate configuration to kernel objects.  It's not a place for
> uevents, for netlink sockets, or for fancy communication.  It allows
> userspace to create an in-kernel object and set/get values on that
> object.  It also allows userspace and kernelspace to share the same
> representation of that object and its values.
>   For more complex interaction, sysfs and procfs are often more
> appropriate.  While you might "configure" all known nodes in configfs,
> the node up/down state might live in sysfs.  A netlink socket for
> up/down events might live in procfs.  And so on.

Right. Thanks for the clarification and elaboration, for I am sure
not entirely clear as to how all these mechanisms relate in detail and
what is appropriate just where, and when to use something more classic
like ioctl etc... ;-)

FWIW, we didn't mean to get uevents out via configfs of course.


Sincerely,
Lars Marowsky-Brée <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

-- 
High Availability & Clustering
SUSE Labs, Research and Development
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH - A Novell Business -- Charles Darwin
"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge"

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/


Re: [Clusters_sig] RE: [Linux-cluster] Re: [Ocfs2-devel] [RFC] nodemanager, ocfs2, dlm

2005-07-21 Thread Lars Marowsky-Bree
On 2005-07-20T11:39:38, Joel Becker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

   In turn, let me clarify a little where configfs fits in to
 things.  Configfs is merely a convenient and transparent method to
 communicate configuration to kernel objects.  It's not a place for
 uevents, for netlink sockets, or for fancy communication.  It allows
 userspace to create an in-kernel object and set/get values on that
 object.  It also allows userspace and kernelspace to share the same
 representation of that object and its values.
   For more complex interaction, sysfs and procfs are often more
 appropriate.  While you might configure all known nodes in configfs,
 the node up/down state might live in sysfs.  A netlink socket for
 up/down events might live in procfs.  And so on.

Right. Thanks for the clarification and elaboration, for I am sure
not entirely clear as to how all these mechanisms relate in detail and
what is appropriate just where, and when to use something more classic
like ioctl etc... ;-)

FWIW, we didn't mean to get uevents out via configfs of course.


Sincerely,
Lars Marowsky-Brée [EMAIL PROTECTED]

-- 
High Availability  Clustering
SUSE Labs, Research and Development
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH - A Novell Business -- Charles Darwin
Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/


Re: [Clusters_sig] RE: [Linux-cluster] Re: [Ocfs2-devel] [RFC] nodemanager, ocfs2, dlm

2005-07-20 Thread Joel Becker
On Wed, Jul 20, 2005 at 08:09:18PM +0200, Lars Marowsky-Bree wrote:
> On 2005-07-20T09:55:31, "Walker, Bruce J (HP-Labs)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
> > Like Lars, I too was under the wrong impression about this configfs
> > "nodemanager" kernel component.  Our discussions in the cluster
> > meeting Monday and Tuesday were assuming it was a general service that
> > other kernel components could/would utilize and possibly also
> > something that could send uevents to non-kernel components wanting a
> > std. way to see membership information/events.
> 
> Let me clarify that this was something we briefly touched on in
> Walldorf: The node manager would (re-)export the current data via sysfs
> (which would result in uevents being sent, too), and not something we
> dreamed up just Monday ;-)

In turn, let me clarify a little where configfs fits in to
things.  Configfs is merely a convenient and transparent method to
communicate configuration to kernel objects.  It's not a place for
uevents, for netlink sockets, or for fancy communication.  It allows
userspace to create an in-kernel object and set/get values on that
object.  It also allows userspace and kernelspace to share the same
representation of that object and its values.
For more complex interaction, sysfs and procfs are often more
appropriate.  While you might "configure" all known nodes in configfs,
the node up/down state might live in sysfs.  A netlink socket for
up/down events might live in procfs.  And so on.

Joel

-- 

"But all my words come back to me
 In shades of mediocrity.
 Like emptiness in harmony
 I need someone to comfort me."

Joel Becker
Senior Member of Technical Staff
Oracle
E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Phone: (650) 506-8127
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/


Re: [Clusters_sig] RE: [Linux-cluster] Re: [Ocfs2-devel] [RFC] nodemanager, ocfs2, dlm

2005-07-20 Thread Lars Marowsky-Bree
On 2005-07-20T09:55:31, "Walker, Bruce J (HP-Labs)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Like Lars, I too was under the wrong impression about this configfs
> "nodemanager" kernel component.  Our discussions in the cluster
> meeting Monday and Tuesday were assuming it was a general service that
> other kernel components could/would utilize and possibly also
> something that could send uevents to non-kernel components wanting a
> std. way to see membership information/events.

Let me clarify that this was something we briefly touched on in
Walldorf: The node manager would (re-)export the current data via sysfs
(which would result in uevents being sent, too), and not something we
dreamed up just Monday ;-)

> As to kernel components without corresponding user-level "managers",
> look no farther than OpenSSI.  Our hope was that we could adapt to a
> user-land membership service and this interface thru configfs would
> drive all our kernel subsystems.

Well, node manager still can provide you the input as to which nodes are
configured, which in a way translates to "membership". The thing it
doesn't seem to provide yet is the supsend/modify/resume cycle which for
example the RHAT DLM seems to require.


Sincerely,
Lars Marowsky-Brée <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

-- 
High Availability & Clustering
SUSE Labs, Research and Development
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH - A Novell Business -- Charles Darwin
"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge"

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/


Re: [Clusters_sig] RE: [Linux-cluster] Re: [Ocfs2-devel] [RFC] nodemanager, ocfs2, dlm

2005-07-20 Thread Lars Marowsky-Bree
On 2005-07-20T09:55:31, Walker, Bruce J (HP-Labs) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 Like Lars, I too was under the wrong impression about this configfs
 nodemanager kernel component.  Our discussions in the cluster
 meeting Monday and Tuesday were assuming it was a general service that
 other kernel components could/would utilize and possibly also
 something that could send uevents to non-kernel components wanting a
 std. way to see membership information/events.

Let me clarify that this was something we briefly touched on in
Walldorf: The node manager would (re-)export the current data via sysfs
(which would result in uevents being sent, too), and not something we
dreamed up just Monday ;-)

 As to kernel components without corresponding user-level managers,
 look no farther than OpenSSI.  Our hope was that we could adapt to a
 user-land membership service and this interface thru configfs would
 drive all our kernel subsystems.

Well, node manager still can provide you the input as to which nodes are
configured, which in a way translates to membership. The thing it
doesn't seem to provide yet is the supsend/modify/resume cycle which for
example the RHAT DLM seems to require.


Sincerely,
Lars Marowsky-Brée [EMAIL PROTECTED]

-- 
High Availability  Clustering
SUSE Labs, Research and Development
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH - A Novell Business -- Charles Darwin
Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/


Re: [Clusters_sig] RE: [Linux-cluster] Re: [Ocfs2-devel] [RFC] nodemanager, ocfs2, dlm

2005-07-20 Thread Joel Becker
On Wed, Jul 20, 2005 at 08:09:18PM +0200, Lars Marowsky-Bree wrote:
 On 2005-07-20T09:55:31, Walker, Bruce J (HP-Labs) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 
  Like Lars, I too was under the wrong impression about this configfs
  nodemanager kernel component.  Our discussions in the cluster
  meeting Monday and Tuesday were assuming it was a general service that
  other kernel components could/would utilize and possibly also
  something that could send uevents to non-kernel components wanting a
  std. way to see membership information/events.
 
 Let me clarify that this was something we briefly touched on in
 Walldorf: The node manager would (re-)export the current data via sysfs
 (which would result in uevents being sent, too), and not something we
 dreamed up just Monday ;-)

In turn, let me clarify a little where configfs fits in to
things.  Configfs is merely a convenient and transparent method to
communicate configuration to kernel objects.  It's not a place for
uevents, for netlink sockets, or for fancy communication.  It allows
userspace to create an in-kernel object and set/get values on that
object.  It also allows userspace and kernelspace to share the same
representation of that object and its values.
For more complex interaction, sysfs and procfs are often more
appropriate.  While you might configure all known nodes in configfs,
the node up/down state might live in sysfs.  A netlink socket for
up/down events might live in procfs.  And so on.

Joel

-- 

But all my words come back to me
 In shades of mediocrity.
 Like emptiness in harmony
 I need someone to comfort me.

Joel Becker
Senior Member of Technical Staff
Oracle
E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Phone: (650) 506-8127
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/