On Thu, 2019-11-14 at 10:57 +0000, Luis Henriques wrote: > Hi! > > So, after the feedback I got from v1 [1] I've sent out a pull-request > for the OSDs [2] which encodes require_osd_release into the OSDMap > client data. This allows the client to figure out which ceph release > the OSDs cluster is running and decide whether or not it's safe to use > the copy-from Op for copy_file_range. > > This new patchset I'm sending simply adds enough functionality to the > kernel client so that it can take advantage of this OSD patch: > > 0001 - adds the ability to decode TYPE_MSGR2 addresses. This is a > required functionality for enabling SERVER_NAUTILUS in the > client. I hope I got the new format right, as I couldn't figure > out what the hard-coded values (see comments) really mean. > nit: the first 3 patch subject lines should probably be prefixed with "libceph:" > 0002 - allows the client to retrieve the new require_osd_release field > from the OSDMap if available. This patch also adds SERVER_MIMIC, > SERVER_NAUTILUS and SERVER_OCTOPUS to the supported features, > which TBH I'm not sure if that's a safe thing to do -- the only > issue I've seen was that Nautilus requires the ability to decode > TYPE_MSGR2 address, but I may have missed others. > Yes, this needs to be done with care. We have to ensure that the server side isn't assuming that the client supports something that it doesn't. I think that means just trawling through the code and verifying whether this is safe. > 0003 - debug code to add require_osd_release to the osdmap debugfs file. > > 0004 - adds the truncate_{seq,size} fields to the 'copy-from' operation > if the OSDs are >= Octopus. > > Also note that, as suggested by Ilya, I've dropped the patch that would > change the default mount options to 'copyfrom'. > > These patches have been tested with the xfstests generic test suite, and > with a couple of other (local) tests that exercise the cephfs > copy_file_range syscall. I didn't saw any issues, but as I said above, > I'm not really sure if adding the SERVER_* flags to the supported > features have other side effects. > > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20191108141555.31176-1-lhenriques@xxxxxxxx/ > [2] https://github.com/ceph/ceph/pull/31611 > I'm just getting caught up on the discussion here, but why was it decided to do it this way instead of just adding a new OSD "copy-from-no-truncseq" operation? Once you tried it once and an OSD didn't support it, you could just give up on using it any longer? That seems a lot simpler than trying to monkey with feature bits. -- Jeff Layton <jlayton@xxxxxxxxxx>