From morrone2 at llnl.gov  Tue Jul  2 18:23:56 2013
From: morrone2 at llnl.gov (Christopher J. Morrone)
Date: Tue, 02 Jul 2013 11:23:56 -0700
Subject: [cdwg] OpenSFS CDWG Call
Message-ID: <51D31ABC.5060506@llnl.gov>

Hi all,

This is a reminder that we will have a Community Development Working 
Group (CDWG) call on Wednesday, July 3, at 9:00am PDT.

Agenda:

* Report on completion of 2.5 scoping effort (Chris)
* Discussion and final decision on changing the official, community 
announced, "scheduled maintenance release" branch from 2.4 to 2.5.
* Discuss applying CC-BY-SA to wiki and/or lustre portal

Call-in: 866-914-3976 (925-424-8105) Passcode: 534986#

Regards,
Chris

From nic_henke at xyratex.com  Wed Jul  3 17:04:44 2013
From: nic_henke at xyratex.com (Nic Henke)
Date: Wed, 3 Jul 2013 12:04:44 -0500
Subject: [cdwg] NFS export for Lustre 2.4.0
Message-ID: <C43B1586-C0E7-46F5-A3A0-2268E1B5F13C@xyratex.com>

Cory - could you say more about the bugs you found in NFS exporting with Lustre 2.4 ?

Cheers,
Nic
Nicholas Henke • Senior Filesystem Developer
Xyratex
office: +1 (651)842 8471 • mobile: +1 (651)895 5795
www.xyratex.com
Connect with Xyratex

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opensfs.org/pipermail/cdwg_lists.opensfs.org/attachments/20130703/a8840026/attachment.html>

From spitzcor at cray.com  Wed Jul  3 17:46:13 2013
From: spitzcor at cray.com (Cory Spitz)
Date: Wed, 3 Jul 2013 17:46:13 +0000
Subject: [cdwg] NFS export for Lustre 2.4.0
In-Reply-To: <C43B1586-C0E7-46F5-A3A0-2268E1B5F13C@xyratex.com>
Message-ID: <CDF9C936.12E52%spitzcor@cray.com>

Sure.  NFS (v3) export seems to be flat broken when the MDS is at 2.4.0.  Our other issues seem to be more related to 3.x kernels or SLES 11 SP2 specific (which is a 3.0 kernel).  We haven't done a lot testing of NFS v4, but I assume that it has a all of the same problems and possibly more.

See:
LU-3550<https://jira.hpdd.intel.com/browse/LU-3550> - Stale file handle on mount when mounting Lustre 2.4 via NFS
LU-3544<https://jira.hpdd.intel.com/browse/LU-3544> - Writing to new files under NFS export from Lustre will result in ENOENT (SLES11SP2)
LU-3486<https://jira.hpdd.intel.com/browse/LU-3486> - LBUG when exporting Lustre 2.4 via NFS on SLES11SP2: ll_dops_init: ASSERTION( de->d_op == &ll_d_ops ) failed
LU-3484<https://jira.hpdd.intel.com/browse/LU-3484> - Incorrect identification of anonymous dentry as root under SLES11SP2
LU-3483<https://jira.hpdd.intel.com/browse/LU-3483> - Null pointer dereference in ll_revalidate_nd (llite/dcache.c) in an NFS mounted Lustre file system

Patrick Farrell from Cray has been working on these tickets and he may be able to chime in with more detail if you are interested.

Thanks,
-Cory

From: Nic Henke <nic_henke at xyratex.com<mailto:nic_henke at xyratex.com>>
Date: Wednesday, July 3, 2013 12:04 PM
To: Cory Spitz <spitzcor at cray.com<mailto:spitzcor at cray.com>>
Cc: "cdwg at lists.opensfs.org<mailto:cdwg at lists.opensfs.org>" <cdwg at lists.opensfs.org<mailto:cdwg at lists.opensfs.org>>
Subject: NFS export for Lustre 2.4.0

Cory - could you say more about the bugs you found in NFS exporting with Lustre 2.4 ?

Cheers,
Nic
Nicholas Henke • Senior Filesystem Developer
Xyratex
office: +1 (651)842 8471 • mobile: +1 (651)895 5795
www.xyratex.com<http://www.xyratex.com/>
Connect with Xyratex<http://blog.xyratex.com/>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opensfs.org/pipermail/cdwg_lists.opensfs.org/attachments/20130703/1cfb621d/attachment.html>

From peter.a.jones at intel.com  Wed Jul  3 18:31:06 2013
From: peter.a.jones at intel.com (Jones, Peter A)
Date: Wed, 3 Jul 2013 18:31:06 +0000
Subject: [cdwg] SLES11 SP3
Message-ID: <CDF9BBF9.2CFB5%peter.a.jones@intel.com>

Cory

Did I misunderstand on the call today? I thought that you had said SP3 was already GA but I cannot see this on suse.com. Is this a very recent release?

Peter

From spitzcor at cray.com  Wed Jul  3 18:57:56 2013
From: spitzcor at cray.com (Cory Spitz)
Date: Wed, 3 Jul 2013 18:57:56 +0000
Subject: [cdwg] SLES11 SP3
In-Reply-To: <CDF9BBF9.2CFB5%peter.a.jones@intel.com>
Message-ID: <CDF9DB74.12EA4%spitzcor@cray.com>

I don't think that it is official yet.  Cray is a part of the SuSE beta
program, which is how we've been working with it so far.  Based on our
experience there I do expect it to release soon.  In fact it looks like
the documentation page at https://www.suse.com/documentation/sles11
specifically mentions "SP3" now, so I imagine it can't be too far away.

-Cory


On 7/3/13 1:31 PM, "Jones, Peter A" <peter.a.jones at intel.com> wrote:

>Cory
>
>Did I misunderstand on the call today? I thought that you had said SP3
>was already GA but I cannot see this on suse.com. Is this a very recent
>release?
>
>Peter

From peter.a.jones at intel.com  Wed Jul  3 19:29:18 2013
From: peter.a.jones at intel.com (Jones, Peter A)
Date: Wed, 3 Jul 2013 19:29:18 +0000
Subject: [cdwg] SLES11 SP3
In-Reply-To: <CDF9DB74.12EA4%spitzcor@cray.com>
Message-ID: <CDF9C96F.2D040%peter.a.jones@intel.com>

Ah yes. Then this matches what we are seeing. I agree that all indications
are that the actual GA is imminent. Thanks for clarifying.

On 7/3/13 11:57 AM, "Cory Spitz" <spitzcor at cray.com> wrote:

>I don't think that it is official yet.  Cray is a part of the SuSE beta
>program, which is how we've been working with it so far.  Based on our
>experience there I do expect it to release soon.  In fact it looks like
>the documentation page at https://www.suse.com/documentation/sles11
>specifically mentions "SP3" now, so I imagine it can't be too far away.
>
>-Cory
>
>
>On 7/3/13 1:31 PM, "Jones, Peter A" <peter.a.jones at intel.com> wrote:
>
>>Cory
>>
>>Did I misunderstand on the call today? I thought that you had said SP3
>>was already GA but I cannot see this on suse.com. Is this a very recent
>>release?
>>
>>Peter
>
>_______________________________________________
>cdwg mailing list
>cdwg at lists.opensfs.org
>http://lists.opensfs.org/listinfo.cgi/cdwg-opensfs.org

From kevin_canady at xyratex.com  Wed Jul  3 20:04:09 2013
From: kevin_canady at xyratex.com (Kevin Canady)
Date: Wed, 3 Jul 2013 13:04:09 -0700
Subject: [cdwg] NFS export for Lustre 2.4.0
In-Reply-To: <CDF9C936.12E52%spitzcor@cray.com>
References: <CDF9C936.12E52%spitzcor@cray.com>
Message-ID: <034D6F4E-39C6-4B1B-BFD5-23C374CAB279@xyratex.com>

Cory,
If I heard correctly on the call, I had the impression that current NFS testing might be limited.  As part of this dialog, if it continues to have legs to be pursued, should there be some added action to explore the current level of testing and what would be desired?  How important is this feature to Cray?  Possibly other interested parties, endusers included might be able to assist with the testing side.  

Just a thought.

Kevin


On Jul 3, 2013, at 10:46 AM, Cory Spitz <spitzcor at cray.com> wrote:

> Sure.  NFS (v3) export seems to be flat broken when the MDS is at 2.4.0.  Our other issues seem to be more related to 3.x kernels or SLES 11 SP2 specific (which is a 3.0 kernel).  We haven't done a lot testing of NFS v4, but I assume that it has a all of the same problems and possibly more.
> 
> See:
> LU-3550 - Stale file handle on mount when mounting Lustre 2.4 via NFS
> LU-3544 - Writing to new files under NFS export from Lustre will result in ENOENT (SLES11SP2)
> LU-3486 - LBUG when exporting Lustre 2.4 via NFS on SLES11SP2: ll_dops_init: ASSERTION( de->d_op == &ll_d_ops ) failed
> LU-3484 - Incorrect identification of anonymous dentry as root under SLES11SP2
> LU-3483 - Null pointer dereference in ll_revalidate_nd (llite/dcache.c) in an NFS mounted Lustre file system
> 
> Patrick Farrell from Cray has been working on these tickets and he may be able to chime in with more detail if you are interested.
> 
> Thanks,
> -Cory
> 
> From: Nic Henke <nic_henke at xyratex.com>
> Date: Wednesday, July 3, 2013 12:04 PM
> To: Cory Spitz <spitzcor at cray.com>
> Cc: "cdwg at lists.opensfs.org" <cdwg at lists.opensfs.org>
> Subject: NFS export for Lustre 2.4.0
> 
>> Cory - could you say more about the bugs you found in NFS exporting with Lustre 2.4 ?
>> 
>> Cheers,
>> Nic
>> Nicholas Henke • Senior Filesystem Developer
>> Xyratex
>> office: +1 (651)842 8471 • mobile: +1 (651)895 5795
>> www.xyratex.com
>> Connect with Xyratex
>> 
> _______________________________________________
> cdwg mailing list
> cdwg at lists.opensfs.org
> http://lists.opensfs.org/listinfo.cgi/cdwg-opensfs.org

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opensfs.org/pipermail/cdwg_lists.opensfs.org/attachments/20130703/93d601f8/attachment.html>

From peter.a.jones at intel.com  Fri Jul  5 15:57:30 2013
From: peter.a.jones at intel.com (Jones, Peter A)
Date: Fri, 5 Jul 2013 15:57:30 +0000
Subject: [cdwg] Lustre 2.5 update - July 5th 2013
Message-ID: <CDFC3AF9.2D311%peter.a.jones@intel.com>

Hi there

Here is an update on the Lustre 2.5 release.

Landings
========

-A number of landings made - see http://git.whamcloud.com/?p=fs/lustre-release.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/master

Testing
=======

- Testing on the 2.4.51 tag is ongoing

Blockers
========

-Full list available at https://jira.hpdd.intel.com/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20LU%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%20%22Lustre%202.5.0%22%20AND%20resolution%20%3D%20Unresolved%20AND%20priority%20%3D%20Blocker%20ORDER%20BY%20key%20DESC
-If there are any issues not presently marked as blockers that you believe should be, please let me know

Other
=====

  *   We are trialling using the Fix In Release field for the 2.5 release to track work hoped to be included in the release; this means that a fuller picture of the progress on the release can be viewed at https://jira.hpdd.intel.com/browse/LU/fixforversion/10295#selectedTab=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.project%3Aversion-issues-panel
-Feature Freeze is July 31st; any features that you hope to include in this release should be uploaded into gerrit in the next week or two to allow sufficient time for testing and reviews
-You can also keep up to date with matters relating to the 2.5 release on the CDWG wiki - http://wiki.opensfs.org/Lustre_2.5.0


Thanks

Peter



From morrone2 at llnl.gov  Tue Jul 16 22:45:48 2013
From: morrone2 at llnl.gov (Christopher J. Morrone)
Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2013 15:45:48 -0700
Subject: [cdwg] OpenSFS CDWG Call
Message-ID: <51E5CD1C.30102@llnl.gov>

Hi all,

This is a reminder that we will have a Community Development Working 
Group (CDWG) call on Wednesday, July 17, at 9:00am PDT.

Agenda:

* Discuss 2.5 development status (everyone report on 2.5 development 
activities)

Call-in: 866-914-3976 (925-424-8105) Passcode: 534986#

Regards,
Chris

From peter.a.jones at intel.com  Fri Jul 19 17:43:26 2013
From: peter.a.jones at intel.com (Jones, Peter A)
Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2013 17:43:26 +0000
Subject: [cdwg] Lustre 2.5 update - July 19th 2013
Message-ID: <CE0EC8CC.2FA9D%peter.a.jones@intel.com>

Hi there

Here is an update on the Lustre 2.5 release.

Landings
========

-A number of landings made - see http://git.whamcloud.com/?p=fs/lustre-release.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/master

Testing
=======

- Testing on the 2.4.51 tag is complete; testing on the 2.4.52 tag is ongoing

Blockers
========

-Full list available at https://jira.hpdd.intel.com/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20LU%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%20%22Lustre%202.5.0%22%20AND%20resolution%20%3D%20Unresolved%20AND%20priority%20%3D%20Blocker%20ORDER%20BY%20key%20DESC
-If there are any issues not presently marked as blockers that you believe should be, please let me know

Other
=====

  *   We are trialling using the Fix In Release field for the 2.5 release to track work hoped to be included in the release; this means that a fuller picture of the progress on the release can be viewed at https://jira.hpdd.intel.com/browse/LU/fixforversion/10295#selectedTab=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.project%3Aversion-issues-panel
-Feature Freeze is July 31st; any features that you hope to include in this release should already have been uploaded into gerrit by now to allow sufficient time for testing and reviews
-You can also keep up to date with matters relating to the 2.5 release on the CDWG wiki - http://wiki.opensfs.org/Lustre_2.5.0


Thanks

Peter



From john_forgan at xyratex.com  Thu Jul 25 11:47:24 2013
From: john_forgan at xyratex.com (John Forgan)
Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2013 12:47:24 +0100
Subject: [cdwg] Monitoring Ticket Progress
Message-ID: <CA+Q9bkguxfWCzwJsDqVQ3C=uKZFekLpxMhJu17PGv9Q4n9nfpA@mail.gmail.com>

Hi,

With so much happening with Lustre and the nature of Open Source
participation in general it can be pretty tricky to keep track of ticket
states and, in particular, defects. Different organisations will possibly
have different priorities and it is difficult for the Gatekeepers and other
monitors to determine relative priorities.

With that in mind, I'm wondering if it might be useful to track those
tickets that seem to have stalled. For example, fixes that have not been
reviewed, or that have been reviewed but not landed and that haven't had
any activity for say a month.

A couple of filters that we've looked at that might be used are:

*Not Completed Review*:

http://review.whamcloud.com/#/q/status:open+age:1mon+Verified%252B1+CodeReview%252B2+-Verified-1+-CodeReview-1+-CodeReview-2,n,z

*Reviewed, but not landed*:

http://review.whamcloud.com/#/q/status:open+age:1mon+Verified%252B1+-Verified-1+-CodeReview-1+-CodeReview-2,n,z


Perhaps the results of these, or similar, filters could be embedded in the
CDWG Wiki page and could be discussed at the CDWG meetings?


To highlight individual priorities we could also ask participants to
provide notice to the CDWG of "troublesome" tickets prior to the CDWG
meeting where they could then be discussed.

I'd be keen to hear your thoughts and perhaps we can discuss the proposal
at the next call?

Best regards

John

-- 

John Forgan
Senior Software Engineering Manager
Xyratex
Office : +44 (0)2392 496819
Mobile: +44 (0)7738 136207
*john_forgan at xyratex.com
*www.xyratex.com

-- 


------------------------------
For additional information including the registered office and the treatment of Xyratex confidential information please visit www.xyratex.com

------------------------------
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opensfs.org/pipermail/cdwg_lists.opensfs.org/attachments/20130725/87725371/attachment.html>

From peter.a.jones at intel.com  Thu Jul 25 15:52:58 2013
From: peter.a.jones at intel.com (Jones, Peter A)
Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2013 15:52:58 +0000
Subject: [cdwg] Monitoring Ticket Progress
In-Reply-To: <CA+Q9bkguxfWCzwJsDqVQ3C=uKZFekLpxMhJu17PGv9Q4n9nfpA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CE169481.302E2%peter.a.jones@intel.com>

Hi John

This would certainly be in alignment with how we expect to handle "troublesome tickets" and indeed – apart from the filters - what we have been doing all along.

These specific filters are a superset of those of interest (they include results from older branches outside the remit of the CDWG), but we could certainly try and refine them and see if this helps to stimulate discussions.

To date, we have rarely (if at all) had specific example raised in the meetings.

Regards

Peter

On 7/25/13 4:47 AM, "John Forgan" <john_forgan at xyratex.com<mailto:john_forgan at xyratex.com>> wrote:

Hi,

With so much happening with Lustre and the nature of Open Source participation in general it can be pretty tricky to keep track of ticket states and, in particular, defects. Different organisations will possibly have different priorities and it is difficult for the Gatekeepers and other monitors to determine relative priorities.

With that in mind, I'm wondering if it might be useful to track those tickets that seem to have stalled. For example, fixes that have not been reviewed, or that have been reviewed but not landed and that haven't had any activity for say a month.

A couple of filters that we've looked at that might be used are:

Not Completed Review:

http://review.whamcloud.com/#/q/status:open+age:1mon+Verified%252B1+CodeReview%252B2+-Verified-1+-CodeReview-1+-CodeReview-2,n,z

Reviewed, but not landed:

http://review.whamcloud.com/#/q/status:open+age:1mon+Verified%252B1+-Verified-1+-CodeReview-1+-CodeReview-2,n,z


Perhaps the results of these, or similar, filters could be embedded in the CDWG Wiki page and could be discussed at the CDWG meetings?


To highlight individual priorities we could also ask participants to provide notice to the CDWG of "troublesome" tickets prior to the CDWG meeting where they could then be discussed.

I'd be keen to hear your thoughts and perhaps we can discuss the proposal at the next call?

Best regards

John

--

John Forgan
Senior Software Engineering Manager
Xyratex
Office : +44 (0)2392 496819
Mobile: +44 (0)7738 136207
john_forgan at xyratex.com<http://john_forgan at xyratex.com>
www.xyratex.com<http://www.xyratex.com>


________________________________
For additional information including the registered office and the treatment of Xyratex confidential information please visit www.xyratex.com<http://www.xyratex.com/>

________________________________

From morrone2 at llnl.gov  Tue Jul 30 18:22:45 2013
From: morrone2 at llnl.gov (Christopher J. Morrone)
Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2013 11:22:45 -0700
Subject: [cdwg] Monitoring Ticket Progress
In-Reply-To: <CA+Q9bkguxfWCzwJsDqVQ3C=uKZFekLpxMhJu17PGv9Q4n9nfpA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CA+Q9bkguxfWCzwJsDqVQ3C=uKZFekLpxMhJu17PGv9Q4n9nfpA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <51F80475.5070901@llnl.gov>

I think you got your titles switched around for your filters.  But even 
then, the filters have some problems with over and under reporting.

I think one of the issues is with the process we employ in gerrit, which 
does not mesh well with its reporting capabilities.  We have a process 
that says multiple +1 reviews are good enough to allow the patch to go 
to the Gatekeeper.  Unfortunately, gerrit does not distinguish between a 
single +1 and multiple +1s in either its visual output or its searching 
capabilities.  That concept of multiple +1s is something that we have 
applied only in our heads.

Perhaps we should adjust the procedures to better suite the tool.  If we 
have someone apply the +2 when the patch is fully reviewed, it would 
make searching and the visual report in the "CR" column of gerrit's 
output much easier to deal with.

Chris

On 07/25/2013 04:47 AM, John Forgan wrote:
> Hi,
>
> With so much happening with Lustre and the nature of Open Source
> participation in general it can be pretty tricky to keep track of ticket
> states and, in particular, defects. Different organisations will
> possibly have different priorities and it is difficult for the
> Gatekeepers and other monitors to determine relative priorities.
>
> With that in mind, I'm wondering if it might be useful to track those
> tickets that seem to have stalled. For example, fixes that have not been
> reviewed, or that have been reviewed but not landed and that haven't had
> any activity for say a month.
>
> A couple of filters that we've looked at that might be used are:
>
> *Not Completed Review*:
>
> http://review.whamcloud.com/#/q/status:open+age:1mon+Verified%252B1+CodeReview%252B2+-Verified-1+-CodeReview-1+-CodeReview-2,n,z
>
> *Reviewed, but not landed*:
>
> http://review.whamcloud.com/#/q/status:open+age:1mon+Verified%252B1+-Verified-1+-CodeReview-1+-CodeReview-2,n,z
>
>
> Perhaps the results of these, or similar, filters could be embedded in
> the CDWG Wiki page and could be discussed at the CDWG meetings?
>
>
> To highlight individual priorities we could also ask participants to
> provide notice to the CDWG of "troublesome" tickets prior to the CDWG
> meeting where they could then be discussed.
>
> I'd be keen to hear your thoughts and perhaps we can discuss the
> proposal at the next call?
>
> Best regards
>
> John
>
> --
>
> John Forgan
> Senior Software Engineering Manager
> Xyratex
> Office : +44 (0)2392 496819
> Mobile: +44 (0)7738 136207
> _john_forgan at xyratex.com <http://john_forgan at xyratex.com>
> _www.xyratex.com <http://www.xyratex.com>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> For additional information including the registered office and the treatment of Xyratex confidential information please visitwww.xyratex.com  <http://www.xyratex.com/>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> cdwg mailing list
> cdwg at lists.opensfs.org
> http://lists.opensfs.org/listinfo.cgi/cdwg-opensfs.org
>

From morrone2 at llnl.gov  Tue Jul 30 18:42:29 2013
From: morrone2 at llnl.gov (Christopher J. Morrone)
Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2013 11:42:29 -0700
Subject: [cdwg] OpenSFS CDWG Call
Message-ID: <51F80915.6000301@llnl.gov>

Hi all,

This is a reminder that we will have a Community Development Working 
Group (CDWG) call on Wednesday, July 31, at 9:00am PDT.

Agenda:

* 2.5.0 development update
* Discuss monitoring ticket progress

Call-in: 866-914-3976 (925-424-8105) Passcode: 534986#

Regards,
Chris

From jodi.levi at intel.com  Wed Jul 31 16:54:07 2013
From: jodi.levi at intel.com (Levi, Jodi)
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2013 16:54:07 +0000
Subject: [cdwg] HSM Lustre 2.5 Release Status
Message-ID: <CE1E9D4D.E950%jodi.levi@intel.com>

HSM Status update:
HSM Parent Ticket:  https://jira.hpdd.intel.com/browse/LU-3608

Release Feature: 4 patches landed  COMPLETE
Exclusive Open: 1 patch landed  COMPLETE
DNE Support:  1 patch landed  COMPLETE

Copy Tool:  1 patch remains, will be resubmitted today  http://review.whamcloud.com/#/c/4737/
Coordinator:  5 patches landed, 1 patch remains is building now  http://review.whamcloud.com/#/c/6912/
Disaster Recovery: 1 patch landed, 1 patch remains and work is in progress  http://review.whamcloud.com/#/c/7027/
Import:  Patch is ready to land  http://review.whamcloud.com/#/c/6536/

Test Framework changes are in progress. Patches needed will land after Feature Freeze.

Thank you!
-Jodi Levi