On Thu, 19 May 2016, Junwang Zhao wrote: > Hi Sage, Haomai, > Please check [1] and give some feedback, I am not sure about > 52436ded943b8f567adb584c50b789431b788a85 > > [1] https://github.com/zhjwpku/ceph/commits/wip-addr-work Great! I made several suggestions, and I have a question for everyone: what should we do if we have a "new" addr (say, for the v2 msgr protocol) and we need to encode it for a client that doesn't have the ADDR2 feature? Right now we are still stuffing the sockaddr_storage in their with whatever sockaddr data we have, but it is indistinguishable from a legacy address. Perhaps it sould encode as blank? (e.g., entity_addr_t())? Or blank, except with a magic nonce (0xffffffff maybe) so that you can tell that it is non-blank but not terribly useful/usable? sage > > Thanks! > > On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 4:44 AM, Sage Weil <sage@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Tue, 17 May 2016, Junwang Zhao wrote: > >> Hi Sage, > >> > >> Check this[1], we should I do next, entity_addrvec_t ? > >> > >> [1] https://github.com/zhjwpku/ceph/commits/wip-addr-work > > > > Looks good! I opened the PR > > > > https://github.com/ceph/ceph/pull/9184 > > > > for review and test. > > > > The next step is just to make a new entity_addr_t encoding that is more > > compact and uses an ADDR2 feature. One commit that defines the new > > feature, then one commit that changes the entity_addr_t encode/decode, > > somewhat like in c728926a86e1410f959011d24700bb07bad1dc2c. I would use > > the new get_sockaddr_len() method for elen, though. > > > > Also, the TYPE_ definitions should really be TYPE_LEGACY = 1, not the > > transport version (IP version), which is already covered by the sa_family > > field in the sockaddr. I think that makes sense... > > > > A third commit would then add the entity_addrvec_t type, similar to what > > is in that same commit. It should also add the type to > > test/encoding/types.h. > > > > Thanks! > > sage > > > > > > > >> > >> On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 12:29 AM, Sage Weil <sage@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > On Mon, 16 May 2016, Sage Weil wrote: > >> >> Hi Junwang, > >> >> > >> >> On Mon, 16 May 2016, Junwang Zhao wrote: > >> >> > Hi Sage, Haomai, > >> >> > > >> >> > I am working on the require-features-patch, I use 'make' to see the conflicts, > >> >> > and change the code to fit the required-feature-patch, [1] is a huge patch > >> >> > that I am still working on, it has not been finished. I really need to check > >> >> > with you whether I am doing it right, since it seems the errors are endless. > >> >> > > >> >> > There are some comments where I am not sure in the patch, like 'not sure'. > >> >> > >> >> I skimmed through this and it looks mostly right, but I see a few cases > >> >> where features aren't needed, e.g. cls_refcount_get in > >> >> cls_refcount_client.cc (there's no addr being encoded in > >> >> cls_refcount_get_op, so no need to make the encoding featureful). > >> >> > >> >> > I didn't split this huge patch into small ones, I am not sure is that a > >> >> > must, if yes, I will split it into small ones. > >> >> > >> >> The end result needs to be a series of small patches, but that doesn't > >> >> have to happen right away. I think it might be useful to do a few small > >> >> sets of changes first just to show what the goal is, though. > >> >> > >> >> I will take the patch below and pull a few sample changes out so you can > >> >> see. Traveling at the moment, but I'll have something pushed today (that > >> >> is also rebased on top of the latest wip-addr-cleanup branch). > >> > > >> > I went on a bit of a binge and have a wip-addr-work branch that is mostly > >> > there. The last thing (I think) is updating msg/simple and msg/async. > >> > These ones should explicitly encode with features 0 since the protocol is > >> > defined in terms of the legacy encoding. > >> > > >> > 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
