On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 10:20:57AM -0700, Shyam_Iyer@xxxxxxxx wrote: > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: linux-scsi-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:linux-scsi- > > owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Ric Wheeler > > Sent: Tuesday, March 29, 2011 7:17 AM > > To: James Bottomley > > Cc: lsf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-fsdevel; linux- > > scsi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; device-mapper development > > Subject: Re: [Lsf] Preliminary Agenda and Activities for LSF > > > > On 03/29/2011 12:36 AM, James Bottomley wrote: > > > Hi All, > > > > > > Since LSF is less than a week away, the programme committee put > > together > > > a just in time preliminary agenda for LSF. As you can see there is > > > still plenty of empty space, which you can make suggestions (to this > > > list with appropriate general list cc's) for filling: > > > > > > > > https://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?hl=en&hl=en&key=0AiQMl7GcVa7OdFdNQz > > M5UDRXUnVEbHlYVmZUVHQ2amc&output=html > > > > > > If you don't make suggestions, the programme committee will feel > > > empowered to make arbitrary assignments based on your topic and > > attendee > > > email requests ... > > > > > > We're still not quite sure what rooms we will have at the Kabuki, but > > > we'll add them to the spreadsheet when we know (they should be close > > to > > > each other). > > > > > > The spreadsheet above also gives contact information for all the > > > attendees and the programme committee. > > > > > > Yours, > > > > > > James Bottomley > > > on behalf of LSF/MM Programme Committee > > > > > > > Here are a few topic ideas: > > > > (1) The first topic that might span IO & FS tracks (or just pull in > > device > > mapper people to an FS track) could be adding new commands that would > > allow > > users to grow/shrink/etc file systems in a generic way. The thought I > > had was > > that we have a reasonable model that we could reuse for these new > > commands like > > mount and mount.fs or fsck and fsck.fs. With btrfs coming down the > > road, it > > could be nice to identify exactly what common operations users want to > > do and > > agree on how to implement them. Alasdair pointed out in the upstream > > thread that > > we had a prototype here in fsadm. > > > > (2) Very high speed, low latency SSD devices and testing. Have we > > settled on the > > need for these devices to all have block level drivers? For S-ATA or > > SAS > > devices, are there known performance issues that require enhancements > > in > > somewhere in the stack? > > > > (3) The union mount versus overlayfs debate - pros and cons. What each > > do well, > > what needs doing. Do we want/need both upstream? (Maybe this can get 10 > > minutes > > in Al's VFS session?) > > > > Thanks! > > > > Ric > > A few others that I think may span across I/O, Block fs..layers. > > 1) Dm-thinp target vs File system thin profile vs block map based thin/trim profile. > Facilitate I/O throttling for thin/trimmable storage. Online and Offline profil. Is above any different from block IO throttling we have got for block devices? > 2) Interfaces for SCSI, Ethernet/*transport configuration parameters floating around in sysfs, procfs. Architecting guidelines for accepting patches for hybrid devices. > 3) DM snapshot vs FS snapshots vs H/W snapshots. There is room for all and they have to help each other > 4) B/W control - VM->DM->Block->Ethernet->Switch->Storage. Pick your subsystem and there are many non-cooperating B/W control constructs in each subsystem. Above is pretty generic. Do you have specific needs/ideas/concerns? Thanks Vivek -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
