June 2021 - SPDK - Ml01.01.Org

SPDK community meetings switched to Teams

by Harris, James R

Hi, The SPDK community and bug scrub meetings have switched to Microsoft Teams starting today. Please check out https://spdk.io/community for links and/or audio-only phone information. Thanks, -Jim

1 month

1
0
0 / 0

test

by xl_3992＠qq.com

test

1 month

1
0
0 / 0

Videos of the 2021 US SPDK, PMDK, and Intel® Performance Analyzers Virtual Forum Talks

by Kariuki, John K

Thank you for attending the 2021 US SPDK, PMDK and Intel Performance Analyzers Virtual forum. The videos of the talks are available in the SPDK YouTube channel at https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL4eJZ5XvN_LQ91sA7PBXiUEYtbTMEFUy1

1 month

1
0
0 / 0

Re: ABI change

by Harris, James R

The dependencies are specified in mk/spdk.lib_deps.mk. The log isn't very clear on that, I've just pushed a patch out for review to fix it: https://review.spdk.io/gerrit/c/spdk/spdk/+/8499. -Jim On 6/24/21, 7:43 AM, "Rodriguez, Edwin" <Ed.Rodriguez(a)netapp.com> wrote: I'm stumped by the error here: https://ci.spdk.io/results/autotest-per-patch/builds/50808/archive/autobu... 00:07:23.879 ************************************ 00:07:23.879 START TEST confirm_makefile_deps 00:07:23.879 ************************************ 00:07:23.880 --------------------------------------------------------------------- 00:07:29.634 there was a dependency mismatch in the library bdev_kv_null 00:07:29.634 The makefile lists: '' 00:07:29.634 readelf outputs : 'bdev jsonrpc json log nvme rpc thread util' 00:07:29.634 --------------------------------------------------------------------- Where does the Makefile list dependencies? And which Makefile? ________________________________ From: Harris, James R <james.r.harris(a)intel.com> Sent: Wednesday, June 23, 2021 5:33 PM To: Storage Performance Development Kit <spdk(a)lists.01.org> Subject: [SPDK] Re: ABI change NetApp Security WARNING: This is an external email. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Hi Ed, Neither. You would need to bump SO_VER and set SO_MINOR back to 0. The spdk_nvme_print_command() change is ABI incompatible, requiring the SO_VER bump. We always set SO_MINOR back to 0 after bumping SO_VER. I would instead suggest a new spdk_nvme_print_command_csi() API, so that you don't have to modify the spdk_nvme_print_command() API. Then you should no longer need any version changes, since SO_MINOR has already been bumped during this release cycle. -Jim On 6/23/21, 2:21 PM, "Rodriguez, Edwin" <Ed.Rodriguez(a)netapp.com> wrote: I've submitted a change which fails with: https://ci.spdk.io/results/autotest-per-patch/builds/50670/archive/autobu... 00:06:41.549 SONAME changed from 'libspdk_nvme.so.5.0' to 'libspdk_nvme.so.5.1' 00:06:41.549 00:06:41.549 15 Added functions: 00:06:41.549 00:06:41.549 [A] 'function int spdk_kv_cmd_fmt_lower(const spdk_nvme_kv_cmd*, char*, size_t)' {spdk_kv_cmd_fmt_lower} 00:06:41.549 [A] 'function int spdk_kv_key_fmt_lower(char*, size_t, uint32_t, const uint8_t*)' {spdk_kv_key_fmt_lower} 00:06:41.549 [A] 'function bool spdk_nvme_ctrlr_is_fabrics(spdk_nvme_ctrlr*)' {spdk_nvme_ctrlr_is_fabrics} 00:06:41.549 [A] 'function int spdk_nvme_kv_cmd_delete(spdk_nvme_ns*, spdk_nvme_qpair*, spdk_nvme_kv_key_t*, spdk_nvme_cmd_cb, void*)' {spdk_nvme_kv_cmd_delete} 00:06:41.549 [A] 'function int spdk_nvme_kv_cmd_exist(spdk_nvme_ns*, spdk_nvme_qpair*, spdk_nvme_kv_key_t*, spdk_nvme_cmd_cb, void*)' {spdk_nvme_kv_cmd_exist} 00:06:41.549 [A] 'function void spdk_nvme_kv_cmd_get_key(const spdk_nvme_kv_cmd*, spdk_nvme_kv_key_t*)' {spdk_nvme_kv_cmd_get_key} 00:06:41.549 [A] 'function int spdk_nvme_kv_cmd_list(spdk_nvme_ns*, spdk_nvme_qpair*, spdk_nvme_kv_key_t*, void*, uint32_t, spdk_nvme_cmd_cb, void*)' {spdk_nvme_kv_cmd_list} 00:06:41.549 [A] 'function int spdk_nvme_kv_cmd_retrieve(spdk_nvme_ns*, spdk_nvme_qpair*, spdk_nvme_kv_key_t*, void*, uint32_t, spdk_nvme_cmd_cb, void*, uint32_t)' {spdk_nvme_kv_cmd_retrieve} 00:06:41.549 [A] 'function void spdk_nvme_kv_cmd_set_key(const spdk_nvme_kv_key_t*, spdk_nvme_kv_cmd*)' {spdk_nvme_kv_cmd_set_key} 00:06:41.549 [A] 'function int spdk_nvme_kv_cmd_store(spdk_nvme_ns*, spdk_nvme_qpair*, spdk_nvme_kv_key_t*, void*, uint32_t, spdk_nvme_cmd_cb, void*, uint32_t)' {spdk_nvme_kv_cmd_store} 00:06:41.549 [A] 'function uint32_t spdk_nvme_kv_get_max_key_len(spdk_nvme_ns*)' {spdk_nvme_kv_get_max_key_len} 00:06:41.549 [A] 'function uint32_t spdk_nvme_kv_get_max_num_keys(spdk_nvme_ns*)' {spdk_nvme_kv_get_max_num_keys} 00:06:41.549 [A] 'function uint32_t spdk_nvme_kv_get_max_value_len(spdk_nvme_ns*)' {spdk_nvme_kv_get_max_value_len} 00:06:41.549 [A] 'function const spdk_nvme_kv_ns_data* spdk_nvme_kv_ns_get_data(spdk_nvme_ns*)' {spdk_nvme_kv_ns_get_data} 00:06:41.549 [A] 'function int spdk_nvme_ns_cmd_copy(spdk_nvme_ns*, spdk_nvme_qpair*, const spdk_nvme_scc_source_range*, uint16_t, uint64_t, spdk_nvme_cmd_cb, void*)' {spdk_nvme_ns_cmd_copy} 00:06:41.549 00:06:41.549 1 function with some sub-type change: 00:06:41.549 00:06:41.549 [C] 'function void spdk_nvme_print_command(uint16_t, spdk_nvme_cmd*)' at nvme_qpair.c:337:1 has some sub-type changes: 00:06:41.549 parameter 3 of type 'enum spdk_nvme_csi' was added Do I need to update both SO_VER and SO_MINOR for libnvme? Or will just updating SO_MINOR suffice? _______________________________________________ SPDK mailing list -- spdk(a)lists.01.org To unsubscribe send an email to spdk-leave(a)lists.01.org _______________________________________________ SPDK mailing list -- spdk(a)lists.01.org To unsubscribe send an email to spdk-leave(a)lists.01.org _______________________________________________ SPDK mailing list -- spdk(a)lists.01.org To unsubscribe send an email to spdk-leave(a)lists.01.org

1 month, 1 week

1
0
0 / 0

Re: ABI change

by Harris, James R

Hi Ed, Neither. You would need to bump SO_VER and set SO_MINOR back to 0. The spdk_nvme_print_command() change is ABI incompatible, requiring the SO_VER bump. We always set SO_MINOR back to 0 after bumping SO_VER. I would instead suggest a new spdk_nvme_print_command_csi() API, so that you don't have to modify the spdk_nvme_print_command() API. Then you should no longer need any version changes, since SO_MINOR has already been bumped during this release cycle. -Jim On 6/23/21, 2:21 PM, "Rodriguez, Edwin" <Ed.Rodriguez(a)netapp.com> wrote: I've submitted a change which fails with: https://ci.spdk.io/results/autotest-per-patch/builds/50670/archive/autobu... 00:06:41.549 SONAME changed from 'libspdk_nvme.so.5.0' to 'libspdk_nvme.so.5.1' 00:06:41.549 00:06:41.549 15 Added functions: 00:06:41.549 00:06:41.549 [A] 'function int spdk_kv_cmd_fmt_lower(const spdk_nvme_kv_cmd*, char*, size_t)' {spdk_kv_cmd_fmt_lower} 00:06:41.549 [A] 'function int spdk_kv_key_fmt_lower(char*, size_t, uint32_t, const uint8_t*)' {spdk_kv_key_fmt_lower} 00:06:41.549 [A] 'function bool spdk_nvme_ctrlr_is_fabrics(spdk_nvme_ctrlr*)' {spdk_nvme_ctrlr_is_fabrics} 00:06:41.549 [A] 'function int spdk_nvme_kv_cmd_delete(spdk_nvme_ns*, spdk_nvme_qpair*, spdk_nvme_kv_key_t*, spdk_nvme_cmd_cb, void*)' {spdk_nvme_kv_cmd_delete} 00:06:41.549 [A] 'function int spdk_nvme_kv_cmd_exist(spdk_nvme_ns*, spdk_nvme_qpair*, spdk_nvme_kv_key_t*, spdk_nvme_cmd_cb, void*)' {spdk_nvme_kv_cmd_exist} 00:06:41.549 [A] 'function void spdk_nvme_kv_cmd_get_key(const spdk_nvme_kv_cmd*, spdk_nvme_kv_key_t*)' {spdk_nvme_kv_cmd_get_key} 00:06:41.549 [A] 'function int spdk_nvme_kv_cmd_list(spdk_nvme_ns*, spdk_nvme_qpair*, spdk_nvme_kv_key_t*, void*, uint32_t, spdk_nvme_cmd_cb, void*)' {spdk_nvme_kv_cmd_list} 00:06:41.549 [A] 'function int spdk_nvme_kv_cmd_retrieve(spdk_nvme_ns*, spdk_nvme_qpair*, spdk_nvme_kv_key_t*, void*, uint32_t, spdk_nvme_cmd_cb, void*, uint32_t)' {spdk_nvme_kv_cmd_retrieve} 00:06:41.549 [A] 'function void spdk_nvme_kv_cmd_set_key(const spdk_nvme_kv_key_t*, spdk_nvme_kv_cmd*)' {spdk_nvme_kv_cmd_set_key} 00:06:41.549 [A] 'function int spdk_nvme_kv_cmd_store(spdk_nvme_ns*, spdk_nvme_qpair*, spdk_nvme_kv_key_t*, void*, uint32_t, spdk_nvme_cmd_cb, void*, uint32_t)' {spdk_nvme_kv_cmd_store} 00:06:41.549 [A] 'function uint32_t spdk_nvme_kv_get_max_key_len(spdk_nvme_ns*)' {spdk_nvme_kv_get_max_key_len} 00:06:41.549 [A] 'function uint32_t spdk_nvme_kv_get_max_num_keys(spdk_nvme_ns*)' {spdk_nvme_kv_get_max_num_keys} 00:06:41.549 [A] 'function uint32_t spdk_nvme_kv_get_max_value_len(spdk_nvme_ns*)' {spdk_nvme_kv_get_max_value_len} 00:06:41.549 [A] 'function const spdk_nvme_kv_ns_data* spdk_nvme_kv_ns_get_data(spdk_nvme_ns*)' {spdk_nvme_kv_ns_get_data} 00:06:41.549 [A] 'function int spdk_nvme_ns_cmd_copy(spdk_nvme_ns*, spdk_nvme_qpair*, const spdk_nvme_scc_source_range*, uint16_t, uint64_t, spdk_nvme_cmd_cb, void*)' {spdk_nvme_ns_cmd_copy} 00:06:41.549 00:06:41.549 1 function with some sub-type change: 00:06:41.549 00:06:41.549 [C] 'function void spdk_nvme_print_command(uint16_t, spdk_nvme_cmd*)' at nvme_qpair.c:337:1 has some sub-type changes: 00:06:41.549 parameter 3 of type 'enum spdk_nvme_csi' was added Do I need to update both SO_VER and SO_MINOR for libnvme? Or will just updating SO_MINOR suffice? _______________________________________________ SPDK mailing list -- spdk(a)lists.01.org To unsubscribe send an email to spdk-leave(a)lists.01.org

1 month, 1 week

2
1
0 / 0

ABI change

by Rodriguez, Edwin

I've submitted a change which fails with: https://ci.spdk.io/results/autotest-per-patch/builds/50670/archive/autobu... 00:06:41.549 SONAME changed from 'libspdk_nvme.so.5.0' to 'libspdk_nvme.so.5.1' 00:06:41.549 00:06:41.549 15 Added functions: 00:06:41.549 00:06:41.549 [A] 'function int spdk_kv_cmd_fmt_lower(const spdk_nvme_kv_cmd*, char*, size_t)' {spdk_kv_cmd_fmt_lower} 00:06:41.549 [A] 'function int spdk_kv_key_fmt_lower(char*, size_t, uint32_t, const uint8_t*)' {spdk_kv_key_fmt_lower} 00:06:41.549 [A] 'function bool spdk_nvme_ctrlr_is_fabrics(spdk_nvme_ctrlr*)' {spdk_nvme_ctrlr_is_fabrics} 00:06:41.549 [A] 'function int spdk_nvme_kv_cmd_delete(spdk_nvme_ns*, spdk_nvme_qpair*, spdk_nvme_kv_key_t*, spdk_nvme_cmd_cb, void*)' {spdk_nvme_kv_cmd_delete} 00:06:41.549 [A] 'function int spdk_nvme_kv_cmd_exist(spdk_nvme_ns*, spdk_nvme_qpair*, spdk_nvme_kv_key_t*, spdk_nvme_cmd_cb, void*)' {spdk_nvme_kv_cmd_exist} 00:06:41.549 [A] 'function void spdk_nvme_kv_cmd_get_key(const spdk_nvme_kv_cmd*, spdk_nvme_kv_key_t*)' {spdk_nvme_kv_cmd_get_key} 00:06:41.549 [A] 'function int spdk_nvme_kv_cmd_list(spdk_nvme_ns*, spdk_nvme_qpair*, spdk_nvme_kv_key_t*, void*, uint32_t, spdk_nvme_cmd_cb, void*)' {spdk_nvme_kv_cmd_list} 00:06:41.549 [A] 'function int spdk_nvme_kv_cmd_retrieve(spdk_nvme_ns*, spdk_nvme_qpair*, spdk_nvme_kv_key_t*, void*, uint32_t, spdk_nvme_cmd_cb, void*, uint32_t)' {spdk_nvme_kv_cmd_retrieve} 00:06:41.549 [A] 'function void spdk_nvme_kv_cmd_set_key(const spdk_nvme_kv_key_t*, spdk_nvme_kv_cmd*)' {spdk_nvme_kv_cmd_set_key} 00:06:41.549 [A] 'function int spdk_nvme_kv_cmd_store(spdk_nvme_ns*, spdk_nvme_qpair*, spdk_nvme_kv_key_t*, void*, uint32_t, spdk_nvme_cmd_cb, void*, uint32_t)' {spdk_nvme_kv_cmd_store} 00:06:41.549 [A] 'function uint32_t spdk_nvme_kv_get_max_key_len(spdk_nvme_ns*)' {spdk_nvme_kv_get_max_key_len} 00:06:41.549 [A] 'function uint32_t spdk_nvme_kv_get_max_num_keys(spdk_nvme_ns*)' {spdk_nvme_kv_get_max_num_keys} 00:06:41.549 [A] 'function uint32_t spdk_nvme_kv_get_max_value_len(spdk_nvme_ns*)' {spdk_nvme_kv_get_max_value_len} 00:06:41.549 [A] 'function const spdk_nvme_kv_ns_data* spdk_nvme_kv_ns_get_data(spdk_nvme_ns*)' {spdk_nvme_kv_ns_get_data} 00:06:41.549 [A] 'function int spdk_nvme_ns_cmd_copy(spdk_nvme_ns*, spdk_nvme_qpair*, const spdk_nvme_scc_source_range*, uint16_t, uint64_t, spdk_nvme_cmd_cb, void*)' {spdk_nvme_ns_cmd_copy} 00:06:41.549 00:06:41.549 1 function with some sub-type change: 00:06:41.549 00:06:41.549 [C] 'function void spdk_nvme_print_command(uint16_t, spdk_nvme_cmd*)' at nvme_qpair.c:337:1 has some sub-type changes: 00:06:41.549 parameter 3 of type 'enum spdk_nvme_csi' was added Do I need to update both SO_VER and SO_MINOR for libnvme? Or will just updating SO_MINOR suffice?

1 month, 1 week

1
0
0 / 0

The 2021 US SPDK, PMDK, and Intel® Performance Analyzers Virtual Forum! June 22nd - 24th

by Kariuki, John K

Join us next week for a 3-day virtual experience with technical presentations, engaging demos, and interactive sessions with industry leaders, experts, developers, and user communities. You can find out more information and register at https://web.cvent.com/event/1671e60a-89ca-4c5a-a090-ff2b0cb7801c/summary

1 month, 2 weeks

1
0
0 / 0

Using SPDK IOAT driver to drive data to PCIe space

by nufosmatic＠nufosmatic.com

Leaving aside for the moment that the IOAT example (build/examples/ioat_perf) is using SPDK library calls that do not differentiate between the memory that is used for managing a mempool and the data that serves as buffers in a mempool, why would the SPDK IOAT perform very, very badly addressing memory in PCIe space. I have a device that I know will run 2-6 GB/s on a x8 interface from other DMA engines in this system. And the IOAT example will run as fast as 5 GB/s into the default DPDK memory reserves. And I know that the IOAT engine (at least the Crystal Beach IOAT engine on an Intel Cascade Lake SuperMicro X11DPG-QT with Sky Lake-E CBDMA) using another commercial middleware will run as much as 9 GB/s in a x16 interface. But the IOAT example, modified to separate the memory management from the data (see rte_mempool_empty() and rte_mempool_populate_virt()), runs <<0.1 GB/s into x8 and x4 PCIe spaces. Is there some other feature that needs to be enabled in the IOAT driver to allow it to drive to PCIe space fastly?

1 month, 2 weeks

2
1
0 / 0

Usecase In AI ?

by Zhipeng Huang

Hi everyone, I'm wondering if we have any SPDK/PMDK use case in machine learning ? -- Zhipeng (Howard) Huang Principle Engineer OpenStack, Kubernetes, CNCF, LF Edge, ONNX, Kubeflow, OpenSDS, Open Service Broker API, OCP, Hyperledger, ETSI, SNIA, DMTF, W3C

1 month, 3 weeks

1
0
0 / 0

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

SPDK June 2021