So, due to the tools are available for all architectures, I guess we
should not limit Bcache to x86. Of course, we would receive bugs because
bcache tools does not behave correctly, but we could simply forward such
bugs to bcache. Another option would be to restrict bcache actions only
to x86. For the rest of archs, bcache devices would only be listed, but
no actions could be performed over them. Opinions?
On 2/1/19 4:48 PM, Ancor Gonzalez Sosa wrote:
For those involved in the bcache support in storage-ng, this is Coly's
answer to the question about the current status in all archs.
-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject: Re: Fate#325346 - bcache in non-x86_64 architectures
Date: Sat, 2 Feb 2019 00:35:11 +0800
From: Coly Li <[email protected]>
On 2019/2/1 5:56 下午, Ancor Gonzalez Sosa wrote:
By the way, Coly, I have a question about that. Assuming bcache is not
production-ready in all architectures (which may be true or not,
that's still an open question) - Are the bcache-tools available in all
architectures, including those in which the technology doesn't work
that well?
Bcache-tools can run on non-x86_64 platform, at least other people and I
run them on s390x. The problem is, bcache code, everywhere, assume the
machine is x86_64, even in formatting a bcache device, it does not
handle bit order in meta data structures, and the checksum calculation
order is wrong on big endian machines. So I would answer, bcache tools
can run on all architectures, but they are only available (behave
correctly) on x86_64 at this moment.
Thanks.
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [email protected]
