Re: [SPDK] Patches for upcoming 18.10 release
by Cao, Gang
Maybe the QoS one https://review.gerrithub.io/#/c/spdk/spdk/+/416672/
Thanks,
Gang
-----Original Message-----
From: SPDK [mailto:spdk-bounces@lists.01.org] On Behalf Of wuzhouhui
Sent: Saturday, October 13, 2018 11:48 AM
To: Storage Performance Development Kit <spdk(a)lists.01.org>
Subject: Re: [SPDK] [CASS SPAM] Patches for upcoming 18.10 release
> On 13 Oct 2018, at 1:54 AM, Harris, James R <james.r.harris(a)intel.com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Ben Walker and I have made an initial pass through the open patches on GerritHub. Critical patches for the upcoming v18.10 release have been marked with an “18.10” hashtag. Please focus on updates, reviews and testing for these patches.
>
> If you have a patch that is not marked with an “18.10” hashtag but you feel is critical, please respond with associated GerritHub URLs to this e-mail.
Feel free to mark this patch series https://review.gerrithub.io/c/spdk/spdk/+/428321/7 <https://review.gerrithub.io/c/spdk/spdk/+/428321/7>
wuzhouhui
>
> Patches without an “18.10” hashtag may still be merged next week provided they are low risk. Other patches will be deferred until after the v18.10 release at the end of this month.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jim Harris
> _______________________________________________
> SPDK mailing list
> SPDK(a)lists.01.org
> https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/spdk
_______________________________________________
SPDK mailing list
SPDK(a)lists.01.org
https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/spdk
3 years, 6 months
Re: [SPDK] spdk_blob_io_unmap() usage
by Harris, James R
Hi Niu,
spdk_blob_io_unmap() is tested quite a bit through the logical volume (lvol) tests. I don’t believe we have any tests with the Optane SSD though.
How many pages are you specifying for the spdk_blob_io_unmap() command?
-Jim
On 10/25/18, 8:08 AM, "SPDK on behalf of Niu, Yawei" <spdk-bounces(a)lists.01.org on behalf of yawei.niu(a)intel.com> wrote:
Hi,
I tried to test spdk_blob_io_unmap() and didn’t get the completion callback (not sure if it because I didn't wait long enough), I checked SPDK source and didn’t see any test case of spdk_blob_io_unmap(), so I was wondering if the unmap is supposed to be executed as fast as blob read/write? Or it's not well supported for certain SSD model? BTW, spdk_blob_io_read/write() works well for me.
My SPDK commit:
051297114cb393d3eb1169520d474e81b4215bf0
My SSD model:
NVMe Controller at 0000:81:00.0 [8086:2701]
=====================================================
Controller Capabilities/Features
================================
Vendor ID: 8086
Subsystem Vendor ID: 8086
Serial Number: PHKS7335003H375AGN
Model Number: INTEL SSDPED1K375GA
Firmware Version: E2010324
...
Intel Marketing Information
==================
Marketing Product Information: Intel (R) Optane (TM) SSD P4800X Series
Namespace ID:1
Deallocate: Supported
Deallocated/Unwritten Error: Not Supported
Deallocated Read Value: Unknown
Deallocate in Write Zeroes: Not Supported
Deallocated Guard Field: 0xFFFF
Flush: Not Supported
Reservation: Not Supported
Size (in LBAs): 732585168 (698M)
Capacity (in LBAs): 732585168 (698M)
Utilization (in LBAs): 732585168 (698M)
EUI64: E4D25C73F0210100
Thin Provisioning: Not Supported
Per-NS Atomic Units: No
NGUID/EUI64 Never Reused: No
Number of LBA Formats: 7
Thanks
-Niu
_______________________________________________
SPDK mailing list
SPDK(a)lists.01.org
https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/spdk
3 years, 6 months
SPDK Event notifications
by Pelplinski, Piotr
Hi,
I started work on SPDK event notifications. I have few doubts that you might help me resolve.
This functionality adds ability to register for specific events (i.e. a new bdev), and be notified asynchronously when those events occur.
My proposal is three RPC calls based on following workflow:
1. After SPDK application starts, client sends RPCs to SPDK about what kinds of events it wants to register for.
2. Then, client subscribes to specified events.
3. Then the client periodically asks for new events.
RPC Calls:
1. show_async_events <component>
component (optional) - show events for specified component only
2. register_async_events <unique_id>, <events>
unique_id - unique identifier for client
events - list of comma separated events which client wants to subscribe to.
(Additional question: Does event should have parameters too? e.g. subscribe only to event: deletion of bdev with specific name)
Response is a list of types of events to which client was subscribed.
3. poll_async_events <unique_id>
unique_id - unique identifier for client
Response is a list of events which happen from last call, which include:
- Component, # component type for which event is raised
- Notification, # type of event, e.g. add, delete or update
- Component_uuid, (e.g lvol uuid)
- Parent_uuid (e.g. lvolstore uuid)
My question is what are the types of events we could register to?
I can think of few generic bdev events like:
-added bdev
-deleted bdev
-updated bdev
What other types of event do you see?
You can also look at the updates on this topic on trello:
https://trello.com/c/ZTIHxp3w/28-asynchronous-rpc-notifications
--
Best Regards,
Piotr Pelpliński
3 years, 6 months
Please rebase pending patches
by Howell, Seth
Hi All,
Several changes have gone into SPDK within the last couple days to enable use of the QAT accelerator with the new crypto bdev. There is now a machine in the Chandler test pool equipped with a QAT card. As a result of this, many of the builds currently queued in the build pool will fail if they are not rebased on the latest master.
If you have any builds queued up right now, please rebase them on top of master.
Thank you
Seth Howell
3 years, 6 months
Chandler Build Pool Outage
by Howell, Seth
Hi all,
The Chandler build pool will be offline this evening. It appears that the port that our physical machines are plugged into has been turned off (fedora-03, fedora-04, fedora-08, freebsd-0). I cannot access them, or the pdu to which they are connected remotely due to them not being connected to the network. I will have to troubleshoot it locally tomorrow morning.
Thanks,
Seth
3 years, 7 months
Announcement: SPDK Jenkins CI is up and running (was Announcement: SPDK Jenkins CI Downtime)
by Zawadzki, Tomasz
Hello everyone,
Jenkins CI for SPDK is now up and running. Patches will be processed as usual.
All builds from weekend were queued up and are running through the tests.
Thanks,
Tomek
-----Original Message-----
From: SPDK [mailto:spdk-bounces@lists.01.org] On Behalf Of Latecki, Karol
Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2018 9:18 AM
To: spdk(a)lists.01.org
Subject: [SPDK] Announcement: SPDK Jenkins CI Downtime
Hi everyone,
I'd like to inform that Jenkins CI for SPDK will be offline for the weekend.
When?
Oct 19th 2:00 PM UTC - Oct 22nd 10:00 AM UTC
Why?
Planned electrical maintenance. Server room will be completely powered down.
Any commits pushed to spdk/spdk Gerrithub during weekend will have tests run first thing in the morning on Oct 22nd.
Thanks,
Karol
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Intel Technology Poland sp. z o.o.
ul. Slowackiego 173 | 80-298 Gdansk | Sad Rejonowy Gdansk Polnoc | VII Wydzial Gospodarczy Krajowego Rejestru Sadowego - KRS 101882 | NIP 957-07-52-316 | Kapital zakladowy 200.000 PLN.
Ta wiadomosc wraz z zalacznikami jest przeznaczona dla okreslonego adresata i moze zawierac informacje poufne. W razie przypadkowego otrzymania tej wiadomosci, prosimy o powiadomienie nadawcy oraz trwale jej usuniecie; jakiekolwiek przegladanie lub rozpowszechnianie jest zabronione.
This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential material for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies; any review or distribution by others is strictly prohibited.
_______________________________________________
SPDK mailing list
SPDK(a)lists.01.org
https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/spdk
3 years, 7 months
Re: [SPDK] nvme device with 0 default namespace
by Harris, James R
On 10/18/18, 2:47 PM, "SPDK on behalf of Joevanni (Bani) Parairo" <spdk-bounces(a)lists.01.org on behalf of jparairo(a)nvxltech.com> wrote:
Hello,
I asked this question during the SPDK meetup with Jim regarding a bug(or feature) during nvme initialization when a target device has a "0" default namespace.
in nvme_ctrlr_construct_namespaces, it only checks if nn==0 if nn != ctrlr->num_ns but proceed to nvme_ctrlr_update_namespaces even if nn==0.
Has anyone every tried this or am I just missing something here?
Hi Joevanni,
Could you file an issue on GitHub for this? https://github.com/spdk/spdk/issues
I see some suspect areas now in the bdev_nvme driver – but let’s further the discussion in the GitHub issue.
Thanks,
-Jim
3 years, 7 months
Status of SPDK NVMe-oF TCP Initiator?
by Stephen Morgan
I'm new to this mailing list, so please excuse any stupid questions. I
looked in the archives but didn't see this question addressed.
Would someone please give me an idea of the timeframe of the SPDK NVMe-oF
TCP Initiator capability? I looked at the roadmap on Trello and if I
understand correctly, the capability is scheduled for this month (18.10).
Is the project still on track? I could definitely use this capability!
Thanks,
Steve
3 years, 7 months
