Hi Ilya, On Tue, 15 May 2018 15:47:43 +0200, Ilya Dryomov wrote: > Are you asking from a PoC point of view or with an eye towards > upstreaming? Yes. > krbd changes look reasonable in principle, but I don't > see how any of it is useful without LIO changes. Doesn't the whole > thing boil down to where you set the expiration time? I was under the impression that some other applications (using kRBD mapped images) may have a use for ensuring that stale I/O isn't processed by the cluster after a user/client specified timeout. If you don't see a need for it outside of LIO, then indeed there's no point merging the kRBD changes. Given that there haven't been any objections to the OSD class functionality, I'll proceed with something for tcmu-runner and withdraw the kRBD patch-set. Cheers, David -- 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
