Hi Sage, Check this: https://github.com/zhjwpku/ceph/commit/2dddc32eb18c2a065963ae33674cb2c8a9e64dc5 The original patch doesn't compile, I add dump and generate_test_instances, now it passed the 'make', I am running the 'make check'. Not sure did I do it right, please give some feedback. Thanks! On Mon, May 9, 2016 at 10:14 PM, Junwang Zhao <zhjwpku@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > I am working on it, the complie is quite slow, I will ping you tomorrow. > > BR, > Zhao > > On Mon, May 9, 2016 at 8:20 PM, Sage Weil <sweil@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> Hi Junwang, >> >> On Sun, 8 May 2016, Junwang Zhao wrote: >>> This weekend, I read the wip-addr-features patches in your repo and >>> the related wip-addr patches in ceph repo, I understand that my task >>> is to make the required-features-patch work by breaking done the 'wip' >>> into small patches to make the required-features-patch finally work. >>> I got one question, when I applied a small individual patch, how can I >>> know it works, will 'make' tell(from the errors)? >> >> 'make' is the first barrier. Making sure 'make check' passes would be >> the next step. You might want to make sure this passes on your machine >> before making any changes, as it can be somewhat sensitive to the >> environment. >> >> Breaking up the current changes into a patch series is a start. I would >> start with that and check in (ping us in #ceph-devel). There are also >> still a lot of remaining places where we don't have features yet and the >> code still doesn't compile. Usually it's a matter of adding arguments to >> a chain of calling functions. If you're not sure how to proceed check >> with us on IRC. >> >> Thanks! >> sage >> >>> >>> Cheers! >>> Zhao >>> >>> On Thu, May 5, 2016 at 11:41 PM, Sage Weil <sweil@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> > Hi Zhao, >>> > >>> > We identified wip-addr as a desireable first step to fixing up the >>> > messenger protocol. It has a bunch of other nice benefits as well, like >>> > being able to support both IPv4 and IPv6 in the same cluster. >>> > >>> > I started rebasing the branch this morning ran into a bunch of non-trivial >>> > questions about how we should structure the entity_addr_t to support both >>> > new address types (ipv4, ipv6, xio, etc.) *and* the a new on-wire >>> > protocol. But this is actually step 2... >>> > >>> > Step 1 is to just get the feature bits plumbed down to every bit of code >>> > that encodes an entity_addr_t to send over the wire so that we will >>> > know whether to encode using the new or legacy format. To do that, I >>> > pushed a simplified branch, wip-addr-features, to >>> > >>> > https://github.com/liewegas/ceph/commits/wip-addr-features >>> > >>> > The are some prelim encoding patches, then a patch that makes >>> > entity_addr_t and entity_inst_t *optionally* accept feature bits. Let's >>> > call it optional-features-patch. This compiles cleanly, and allows either >>> > an existing featureless encode >>> > >>> > entity_addr_t foo; >>> > ::encode(foo, bl); // old way we need to eliminate >>> > >>> > or a featured encode >>> > >>> > entity_addr_t foo; >>> > ::encode(foo, bl, features); // what we want >>> > >>> > compile. >>> > >>> > Then there's a patch that makes the old way not compile. Let's call it >>> > required-features-patch. This will make the compiler spit out a million >>> > errors for all the call sites that still need to be fixed. >>> > >>> > Finally, there is a 'wip' commit that fixes some but not all call sites. >>> > This commit needs to be broken down into simple, individual changes that >>> > can be tested and reviewed separately. >>> > >>> > The idea is to work with the require-features-patch applied to identify >>> > remaining call sites that need features to encode entity_addr_t. Create >>> > small, contained patches that fix individual modules, call sites, or add >>> > supporting infrastructure (like the changes that expose features to OSD >>> > cls ops in objclass/*). >>> > >>> > Once there are several of those, remove the require-features-patch, and >>> > make sure the changes are safe and clean and everything still works >>> > properly. We can merge these as we go to make incremental progress. >>> > >>> > Finally, once *everything* is fixed to pass features to addr encode sites, >>> > the last commit will be the require-features-patch, and we can get it all >>> > in master. >>> > >>> > That will lay the foundation so that we can change the entity_addr_t >>> > encoding to support the new protocols and encoding, the entity_addrvec_t >>> > type, and so on. >>> > >>> > (The plan is to replace most instnaces of entity_addr_t with >>> > entity_addrvec_t--a list of addresses instead of a single one. And make >>> > entity_addrvec_t encoded with old features spit out the legacy addr with >>> > the legacy entity_addr_t encoding so that old clients can still function.) >>> > >>> > We're all in #ceph-devel on irc.oftc.net--feel free to ask questions there >>> > or on this email thread. Or we can do another video conf session to go >>> > through it. >>> > >>> > Thanks! >>> > sage >>> >>> -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph-devel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
