Re: [2.6.23 PATCH 13/18] dm: netlink
On 7/13/07, Evgeniy Polyakov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, Jul 12, 2007 at 04:31:15PM -0700, Andrew Morton ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: Need a dependency on NET there? It's really sad to make DM dependent on the network layer. Yes, it would be somewhat sad. However one can presumably continue to use DM, just without DM netlink events. On my machine device mapper (lvm, raid) does not work without sockets, (maybe not dm, but hotplug, which creates nodes, or configuration) so it already depends on it. Hotplug depends on networking. You missed the day when everyone started to depend on networking :) Right, uevents (udev) depend on networking. One could still use the /sbin/hotplug fork-bomb, but boxes that don't want networking are often that small, that the amount of events the kernel creates today, leads immediately to OOM, because of too many event processes forked at the same time. Kay - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe netdev in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: [2.6.23 PATCH 13/18] dm: netlink
On Thu, Jul 12, 2007 at 04:31:15PM -0700, Andrew Morton ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: Need a dependency on NET there? It's really sad to make DM dependent on the network layer. Yes, it would be somewhat sad. However one can presumably continue to use DM, just without DM netlink events. On my machine device mapper (lvm, raid) does not work without sockets, (maybe not dm, but hotplug, which creates nodes, or configuration) so it already depends on it. Hotplug depends on networking. You missed the day when everyone started to depend on networking :) -- Evgeniy Polyakov - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe netdev in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: [dm-devel] Re: [2.6.23 PATCH 13/18] dm: netlink
On Thu, 12 Jul 2007 19:00:59 PDT, Mike Anderson said: No, all admin tools and interfaces function as they do today. The dm-netlink patch series only contains 9 deletions (actual just one true deletion of existing kernel code the others are due to break up of the patch into compilable chunks). The intent was not to break users or force migration. OK, I'll bite - if the admin tools function as before, who is *using* the code? Or do the admin tools have a preferred netlink component and a fallback set of code if that fails? pgpNP3lE0pyDp.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [2.6.23 PATCH 13/18] dm: netlink
On Wed, Jul 11, 2007 at 04:37:36PM -0700, Mike Anderson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: --- linux.orig/include/linux/netlink.h2007-07-11 21:37:31.0 +0100 +++ linux/include/linux/netlink.h 2007-07-11 21:37:50.0 +0100 @@ -21,7 +21,7 @@ #define NETLINK_DNRTMSG 14 /* DECnet routing messages */ #define NETLINK_KOBJECT_UEVENT 15 /* Kernel messages to userspace */ #define NETLINK_GENERIC 16 -/* leave room for NETLINK_DM (DM Events) */ +#define NETLINK_DM 17 /* Device Mapper */ #define NETLINK_SCSITRANSPORT18 /* SCSI Transports */ #define NETLINK_ECRYPTFS 19 Have the net guys checked this? No. The support is a derivative of the netlink support in scsi_transport_iscsi.c. I'm not sure about all net guys, but the first question rised after reading this - why do you want special netlink family and do not want to use interfaces created on top of - like connector and genetlink? -andmike -- Evgeniy Polyakov - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe netdev in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: [2.6.23 PATCH 13/18] dm: netlink
From: Evgeniy Polyakov [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2007 12:10:29 +0400 On Wed, Jul 11, 2007 at 04:37:36PM -0700, Mike Anderson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: --- linux.orig/include/linux/netlink.h 2007-07-11 21:37:31.0 +0100 +++ linux/include/linux/netlink.h 2007-07-11 21:37:50.0 +0100 @@ -21,7 +21,7 @@ #define NETLINK_DNRTMSG14 /* DECnet routing messages */ #define NETLINK_KOBJECT_UEVENT 15 /* Kernel messages to userspace */ #define NETLINK_GENERIC16 -/* leave room for NETLINK_DM (DM Events) */ +#define NETLINK_DM 17 /* Device Mapper */ #define NETLINK_SCSITRANSPORT 18 /* SCSI Transports */ #define NETLINK_ECRYPTFS 19 Have the net guys checked this? No. The support is a derivative of the netlink support in scsi_transport_iscsi.c. I'm not sure about all net guys, but the first question rised after reading this - why do you want special netlink family and do not want to use interfaces created on top of - like connector and genetlink? I agree, there is really no reason to not at least use genetlink. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe netdev in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: [2.6.23 PATCH 13/18] dm: netlink
David Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: Evgeniy Polyakov [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2007 12:10:29 +0400 On Wed, Jul 11, 2007 at 04:37:36PM -0700, Mike Anderson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: --- linux.orig/include/linux/netlink.h2007-07-11 21:37:31.0 +0100 +++ linux/include/linux/netlink.h 2007-07-11 21:37:50.0 +0100 @@ -21,7 +21,7 @@ #define NETLINK_DNRTMSG 14 /* DECnet routing messages */ #define NETLINK_KOBJECT_UEVENT 15 /* Kernel messages to userspace */ #define NETLINK_GENERIC 16 -/* leave room for NETLINK_DM (DM Events) */ +#define NETLINK_DM 17 /* Device Mapper */ #define NETLINK_SCSITRANSPORT18 /* SCSI Transports */ #define NETLINK_ECRYPTFS 19 Have the net guys checked this? No. The support is a derivative of the netlink support in scsi_transport_iscsi.c. I'm not sure about all net guys, but the first question rised after reading this - why do you want special netlink family and do not want to use interfaces created on top of - like connector and genetlink? I agree, there is really no reason to not at least use genetlink. ok, I will switch over to using genetlink. -andmike -- Michael Anderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe netdev in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: [2.6.23 PATCH 13/18] dm: netlink
Matt Mackall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, Jul 11, 2007 at 02:27:12PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: On Wed, 11 Jul 2007 22:01:37 +0100 Alasdair G Kergon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: Mike Anderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] This patch adds a dm-netlink skeleton support to the Makefile, and the dm directory. ... +config DM_NETLINK + bool DM netlink events (EXPERIMENTAL) + depends on BLK_DEV_DM EXPERIMENTAL + ---help--- + Generate netlink events for DM events. Need a dependency on NET there? It's really sad to make DM dependent on the network layer. It wouldn't be all of dm. Only the netlink based event interface would be dependent. -andmike -- Michael Anderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe netdev in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: [2.6.23 PATCH 13/18] dm: netlink
On Thu, 12 Jul 2007 18:19:20 -0500 Matt Mackall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, Jul 11, 2007 at 02:27:12PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: On Wed, 11 Jul 2007 22:01:37 +0100 Alasdair G Kergon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: Mike Anderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] This patch adds a dm-netlink skeleton support to the Makefile, and the dm directory. ... +config DM_NETLINK + bool DM netlink events (EXPERIMENTAL) + depends on BLK_DEV_DM EXPERIMENTAL + ---help--- + Generate netlink events for DM events. Need a dependency on NET there? It's really sad to make DM dependent on the network layer. Yes, it would be somewhat sad. However one can presumably continue to use DM, just without DM netlink events. But that probably means that one will not be able to use the standard DM admin tools without networking. Maybe there will remain alternative but cruder ways to get things done? - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe netdev in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: [2.6.23 PATCH 13/18] dm: netlink
On Wed, Jul 11, 2007 at 02:27:12PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: On Wed, 11 Jul 2007 22:01:37 +0100 Alasdair G Kergon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: Mike Anderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] This patch adds a dm-netlink skeleton support to the Makefile, and the dm directory. ... +config DM_NETLINK + bool DM netlink events (EXPERIMENTAL) + depends on BLK_DEV_DM EXPERIMENTAL + ---help--- + Generate netlink events for DM events. Need a dependency on NET there? It's really sad to make DM dependent on the network layer. -- Mathematics is the supreme nostalgia of our time. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe netdev in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: [dm-devel] Re: [2.6.23 PATCH 13/18] dm: netlink
Andrew Morton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, 12 Jul 2007 18:19:20 -0500 Matt Mackall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, Jul 11, 2007 at 02:27:12PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: On Wed, 11 Jul 2007 22:01:37 +0100 Alasdair G Kergon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: Mike Anderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] This patch adds a dm-netlink skeleton support to the Makefile, and the dm directory. ... +config DM_NETLINK + bool DM netlink events (EXPERIMENTAL) + depends on BLK_DEV_DM EXPERIMENTAL + ---help--- + Generate netlink events for DM events. Need a dependency on NET there? It's really sad to make DM dependent on the network layer. Yes, it would be somewhat sad. However one can presumably continue to use DM, just without DM netlink events. Yes, if you deselect you just do not receive the events through netlink. But that probably means that one will not be able to use the standard DM admin tools without networking. Maybe there will remain alternative but cruder ways to get things done? No, all admin tools and interfaces function as they do today. The dm-netlink patch series only contains 9 deletions (actual just one true deletion of existing kernel code the others are due to break up of the patch into compilable chunks). The intent was not to break users or force migration. -andmike -- Michael Anderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe netdev in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: [2.6.23 PATCH 13/18] dm: netlink
On Wed, 11 Jul 2007 22:01:37 +0100
Alasdair G Kergon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
From: Mike Anderson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
This patch adds a dm-netlink skeleton support to the Makefile, and the dm
directory.
...
+config DM_NETLINK
+ bool DM netlink events (EXPERIMENTAL)
+ depends on BLK_DEV_DM EXPERIMENTAL
+ ---help---
+ Generate netlink events for DM events.
Need a dependency on NET there?
...
+#ifdef CONFIG_DM_NETLINK
+
+int dm_netlink_init(void);
+void dm_netlink_exit(void);
+
+#else/* CONFIG_DM_NETLINK */
+
+static inline int __init dm_netlink_init(void)
The __init here isn't needed (doesn't make sense, is missing the required
#include anyway)
+{
+ return 0;
+}
+static inline void dm_netlink_exit(void)
+{
+}
+
+#endif /* CONFIG_DM_NETLINK */
+
+#endif /* DM_NETLINK_H */
Index: linux/drivers/md/dm.c
===
--- linux.orig/drivers/md/dm.c2007-07-11 21:37:47.0 +0100
+++ linux/drivers/md/dm.c 2007-07-11 21:37:50.0 +0100
@@ -7,6 +7,7 @@
#include dm.h
#include dm-bio-list.h
+#include dm-netlink.h
#include linux/init.h
#include linux/module.h
@@ -176,6 +177,7 @@ int (*_inits[])(void) __initdata = {
dm_linear_init,
dm_stripe_init,
dm_interface_init,
+ dm_netlink_init,
};
void (*_exits[])(void) = {
@@ -184,6 +186,7 @@ void (*_exits[])(void) = {
dm_linear_exit,
dm_stripe_exit,
dm_interface_exit,
+ dm_netlink_exit,
};
hm, so if CONFIG_DM_NETLINK=n we end up taking the address of an inlined
function. So the __init above _did_ make sense, in a peculiar way. I
don't know that gcc will actually put that converted-to-non-inline function
into the desired section though.
There's no way in which those inlined functions will ever get inlined.
Perhaps all this would be better if there was no implementation of
dm_netlink_init() and dm_netlink_exit() if CONFIG_DM_NETLINK=n and you just
whack the requisite ifdefs into these tables here?
static int __init dm_init(void)
Index: linux/include/linux/netlink.h
===
--- linux.orig/include/linux/netlink.h2007-07-11 21:37:31.0
+0100
+++ linux/include/linux/netlink.h 2007-07-11 21:37:50.0 +0100
@@ -21,7 +21,7 @@
#define NETLINK_DNRTMSG 14 /* DECnet routing messages */
#define NETLINK_KOBJECT_UEVENT 15 /* Kernel messages to userspace
*/
#define NETLINK_GENERIC 16
-/* leave room for NETLINK_DM (DM Events) */
+#define NETLINK_DM 17 /* Device Mapper */
#define NETLINK_SCSITRANSPORT18 /* SCSI Transports */
#define NETLINK_ECRYPTFS 19
Have the net guys checked this?
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe netdev in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: [2.6.23 PATCH 13/18] dm: netlink
Andrew Morton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 11 Jul 2007 22:01:37 +0100
Alasdair G Kergon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
From: Mike Anderson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
This patch adds a dm-netlink skeleton support to the Makefile, and the dm
directory.
...
+config DM_NETLINK
+ bool DM netlink events (EXPERIMENTAL)
+ depends on BLK_DEV_DM EXPERIMENTAL
+ ---help---
+ Generate netlink events for DM events.
Need a dependency on NET there?
Yes.
...
+#ifdef CONFIG_DM_NETLINK
+
+int dm_netlink_init(void);
+void dm_netlink_exit(void);
+
+#else /* CONFIG_DM_NETLINK */
+
+static inline int __init dm_netlink_init(void)
The __init here isn't needed (doesn't make sense, is missing the required
#include anyway)
+{
+ return 0;
+}
+static inline void dm_netlink_exit(void)
+{
+}
+
+#endif /* CONFIG_DM_NETLINK */
+
+#endif /* DM_NETLINK_H */
Index: linux/drivers/md/dm.c
===
--- linux.orig/drivers/md/dm.c 2007-07-11 21:37:47.0 +0100
+++ linux/drivers/md/dm.c 2007-07-11 21:37:50.0 +0100
@@ -7,6 +7,7 @@
#include dm.h
#include dm-bio-list.h
+#include dm-netlink.h
#include linux/init.h
#include linux/module.h
@@ -176,6 +177,7 @@ int (*_inits[])(void) __initdata = {
dm_linear_init,
dm_stripe_init,
dm_interface_init,
+ dm_netlink_init,
};
void (*_exits[])(void) = {
@@ -184,6 +186,7 @@ void (*_exits[])(void) = {
dm_linear_exit,
dm_stripe_exit,
dm_interface_exit,
+ dm_netlink_exit,
};
hm, so if CONFIG_DM_NETLINK=n we end up taking the address of an inlined
function. So the __init above _did_ make sense, in a peculiar way. I
don't know that gcc will actually put that converted-to-non-inline function
into the desired section though.
There's no way in which those inlined functions will ever get inlined.
Perhaps all this would be better if there was no implementation of
dm_netlink_init() and dm_netlink_exit() if CONFIG_DM_NETLINK=n and you just
whack the requisite ifdefs into these tables here?
ok, I will switch to the ifdef CONFIG_DM_NETLINK in the tables.
static int __init dm_init(void)
Index: linux/include/linux/netlink.h
===
--- linux.orig/include/linux/netlink.h 2007-07-11 21:37:31.0
+0100
+++ linux/include/linux/netlink.h 2007-07-11 21:37:50.0 +0100
@@ -21,7 +21,7 @@
#define NETLINK_DNRTMSG14 /* DECnet routing messages */
#define NETLINK_KOBJECT_UEVENT 15 /* Kernel messages to userspace
*/
#define NETLINK_GENERIC16
-/* leave room for NETLINK_DM (DM Events) */
+#define NETLINK_DM 17 /* Device Mapper */
#define NETLINK_SCSITRANSPORT 18 /* SCSI Transports */
#define NETLINK_ECRYPTFS 19
Have the net guys checked this?
No. The support is a derivative of the netlink support in
scsi_transport_iscsi.c.
-andmike
--
Michael Anderson
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe netdev in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
