On Thu, 2022-03-31 at 14:52 +0800, xiubli@xxxxxxxxxx wrote: > From: Xiubo Li <xiubli@xxxxxxxxxx> > > URL: https://tracker.ceph.com/issues/54411 > Signed-off-by: Xiubo Li <xiubli@xxxxxxxxxx> > --- > fs/ceph/mds_client.h | 9 ++++++--- > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/fs/ceph/mds_client.h b/fs/ceph/mds_client.h > index 33497846e47e..32107c26f50d 100644 > --- a/fs/ceph/mds_client.h > +++ b/fs/ceph/mds_client.h > @@ -27,10 +27,13 @@ enum ceph_feature_type { > CEPHFS_FEATURE_RECLAIM_CLIENT, > CEPHFS_FEATURE_LAZY_CAP_WANTED, > CEPHFS_FEATURE_MULTI_RECONNECT, > - CEPHFS_FEATURE_DELEG_INO, > - CEPHFS_FEATURE_METRIC_COLLECT, > + CEPHFS_FEATURE_OCTOPUS, > + CEPHFS_FEATURE_DELEG_INO = CEPHFS_FEATURE_OCTOPUS, > + CEPHFS_FEATURE_PACIFIC, > + CEPHFS_FEATURE_METRIC_COLLECT = CEPHFS_FEATURE_PACIFIC, > + CEPHFS_FEATURE_QUINCY, > > - CEPHFS_FEATURE_MAX = CEPHFS_FEATURE_METRIC_COLLECT, > + CEPHFS_FEATURE_MAX = CEPHFS_FEATURE_QUINCY, > }; > > /* (cc'ing Patrick) I think we decided a while back to move away from "release" feature flags like this, because they're ambiguous. We do occasionally backport features to later stable versions and then the release flag becomes meaningless. If the "feature" here is extended metrics, then this should be something like CEPHFS_FEATURE_METRIC_V2 or METRIC_EXTENDED or something. IOW, the flag name should describe the feature that we're advertising. -- Jeff Layton <jlayton@xxxxxxxxxx>
