Lustre discuss - Nov 2009 - Anyone built 1.8 or 1.6 on Fedora 12's 2.6.31 yet?

https://bugzilla.lustre.org/show_bug.cgi?id=21113 seems to suggest that
Sun/Lustre will be building it as F12 should be the base for RH6 (please correct
me if I''m wrong) but I was just wondering if anyone was way ahead and
had tried this already?

https://bugzilla.lustre.org/show_bug.cgi?id=21340 suggests I can use the 2.6.27
patches (are they rolled into 1.8.1.1??) plus the patch in that thread to get it
working.  Again, I''ll give it a go but I just figured I''d ask
before possibly redoing work that''s already been done.

Thanks,

-- 
Stephen Willey
Senior Systems Engineer
Framestore
19-23 Wells Street, London W1T 3PQ
+44 207 344 8000
www.framestore.com

On 2009-11-19, at 01:48, Stephen Willey wrote:
> https://bugzilla.lustre.org/show_bug.cgi?id=21113 seems to suggest  
> that Sun/Lustre will be building it as F12 should be the base for  
> RH6 (please correct me if I''m wrong) but I was just wondering if  
> anyone was way ahead and had tried this already?
Some of our other customers are also interested in porting to FC12 as  
a stepping stone to RHEL6.  We are getting closer on the client side,  
but the server still needs work.  If anyone is interested to port the  
server code, then I''d be interested to hear, because I''d
prefer to
spend any development effort to remove the server patches entirely.   
Instead of reworking the patches yet again, this needs some effort in  
the Lustre and ldiskfs code to allow it to use newer kernel APIs and  
then (hopefully) we''ll never need to patch for Lustre again.
> https://bugzilla.lustre.org/show_bug.cgi?id=21340 suggests I can use  
> the 2.6.27 patches (are they rolled into 1.8.1.1??) plus the patch  
> in that thread to get it working.  Again, I''ll give it a go but I
> just figured I''d ask before possibly redoing work that''s
already
> been done.

The 2.6.27 support (both client and server) should be in 1.8.1.1  
AFAIK, because it runs on SLES11.

Cheers, Andreas
--
Andreas Dilger
Sr. Staff Engineer, Lustre Group
Sun Microsystems of Canada, Inc.

I''ve got this morning''s b1_8 branch to compile on Fedora 12. 
For those interested, here are the steps.

(Disclaimer:  I am not a programmer and the below changes were hacks I made
based on far too little knowledge.  If I''ve done something horribly
wrong, please reply saying so).

0) Just remembereed - I happened to symlink /usr/src/linux to
kernels/2.6.31.5-127.fc12.x86_64 - Just me being lazy when running configure too
many times.

1) /usr/src/kernels/2.6.31.5-127.fc12.x86_64/include/linux/posix_acl.h needs
#include <linux/fs.h> adding to it.
I don''t know why and this is probably my hackiest hack, but if not, it
fails to compile in the configure and causes problems later on.

2) checkout the b1_8 tree and patch it with the attached.

3) sh autogen.sh
4) ./configure --disable-server

5) make rpms CFLAGS=-fno-strict-aliasing
I thought no-strict-aliasing was supposed to be picked up by default for kernel
related builds, but I needed to add this.

Once they''re built and installed, strangely, the mgc module will not
load automatically.  I had to manually modprobe mgc before I could then
successfully mount a Lustre FS.  If anyone knows why or if there''s a
fix, please let me know.

Hope it helps...




----- "Andreas Dilger" <adilger at sun.com> wrote:
> On 2009-11-19, at 01:48, Stephen Willey wrote:
> > https://bugzilla.lustre.org/show_bug.cgi?id=21113 seems to suggest 
> 
> > that Sun/Lustre will be building it as F12 should be the base for  
> > RH6 (please correct me if I''m wrong) but I was just wondering
if
> > anyone was way ahead and had tried this already?
> 
> Some of our other customers are also interested in porting to FC12 as 
> 
> a stepping stone to RHEL6.  We are getting closer on the client side, 
> 
> but the server still needs work.  If anyone is interested to port the 
> 
> server code, then I''d be interested to hear, because I''d
prefer to
> spend any development effort to remove the server patches entirely.  
> 
> Instead of reworking the patches yet again, this needs some effort in 
> 
> the Lustre and ldiskfs code to allow it to use newer kernel APIs and 
> 
> then (hopefully) we''ll never need to patch for Lustre again.
> 
> > https://bugzilla.lustre.org/show_bug.cgi?id=21340 suggests I can use
>  
> > the 2.6.27 patches (are they rolled into 1.8.1.1??) plus the patch 
> 
> > in that thread to get it working.  Again, I''ll give it a go
but I
> > just figured I''d ask before possibly redoing work
that''s already
> > been done.
> 
> 
> The 2.6.27 support (both client and server) should be in 1.8.1.1  
> AFAIK, because it runs on SLES11.
> 
> Cheers, Andreas
> --
> Andreas Dilger
> Sr. Staff Engineer, Lustre Group
> Sun Microsystems of Canada, Inc.
-- 
Stephen Willey
Senior Systems Engineer
Framestore
19-23 Wells Street, London W1T 3PQ
+44 207 344 8000
www.framestore.com 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: f12_changes.patch
Type: text/x-patch
Size: 5682 bytes
Desc: not available
Url :
http://lists.lustre.org/pipermail/lustre-discuss/attachments/20091126/7f798feb/attachment-0001.bin

Hi,

Concerning the module loading issue you met, we hit the same while 
trying to compile and run Lustre 2.0 on 2.6.31 Fedora 12 kernel (see 
bugzilla https://bugzilla.lustre.org/show_bug.cgi?id=21500 for details).

 From 2.6.28, CONFIG_KMOD was removed from the kernel, and the problem 
is that Lustre checks on this define to call request_module, thus 
dynamically loading kernel modules like mgc and lmv.

We have developed a patch to fix this issue, it is attachment 
https://bugzilla.lustre.org/attachment.cgi?id=27315 from bug 21500. 
Maybe the configure check is not optimal, but at least it is working for 
us :)

Cheers,
Sebastien.


Stephen Willey a ?crit :
> I''ve got this morning''s b1_8 branch to compile on Fedora
12.  For those interested, here are the steps.
> 
> (Disclaimer:  I am not a programmer and the below changes were hacks I made
based on far too little knowledge.  If I''ve done something horribly
wrong, please reply saying so).
> 
> 0) Just remembereed - I happened to symlink /usr/src/linux to
kernels/2.6.31.5-127.fc12.x86_64 - Just me being lazy when running configure too
many times.
> 
> 1) /usr/src/kernels/2.6.31.5-127.fc12.x86_64/include/linux/posix_acl.h
needs #include <linux/fs.h> adding to it.
> I don''t know why and this is probably my hackiest hack, but if
not, it fails to compile in the configure and causes problems later on.
> 
> 2) checkout the b1_8 tree and patch it with the attached.
> 
> 3) sh autogen.sh
> 4) ./configure --disable-server
> 
> 5) make rpms CFLAGS=-fno-strict-aliasing
> I thought no-strict-aliasing was supposed to be picked up by default for
kernel related builds, but I needed to add this.
> 
> Once they''re built and installed, strangely, the mgc module will
not load automatically.  I had to manually modprobe mgc before I could then
successfully mount a Lustre FS.  If anyone knows why or if there''s a
fix, please let me know.
> 
> Hope it helps...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ----- "Andreas Dilger" <adilger at sun.com> wrote:
> 
>> On 2009-11-19, at 01:48, Stephen Willey wrote:
>>> https://bugzilla.lustre.org/show_bug.cgi?id=21113 seems to suggest 
>>> that Sun/Lustre will be building it as F12 should be the base for  
>>> RH6 (please correct me if I''m wrong) but I was just
wondering if
>>> anyone was way ahead and had tried this already?
>> Some of our other customers are also interested in porting to FC12 as 
>>
>> a stepping stone to RHEL6.  We are getting closer on the client side, 
>>
>> but the server still needs work.  If anyone is interested to port the 
>>
>> server code, then I''d be interested to hear, because
I''d prefer to
>> spend any development effort to remove the server patches entirely.  
>>
>> Instead of reworking the patches yet again, this needs some effort in 
>>
>> the Lustre and ldiskfs code to allow it to use newer kernel APIs and 
>>
>> then (hopefully) we''ll never need to patch for Lustre again.
>>
>>> https://bugzilla.lustre.org/show_bug.cgi?id=21340 suggests I can
use
>>  
>>> the 2.6.27 patches (are they rolled into 1.8.1.1??) plus the patch 
>>> in that thread to get it working.  Again, I''ll give it a
go but I
>>> just figured I''d ask before possibly redoing work
that''s already
>>> been done.
>>
>> The 2.6.27 support (both client and server) should be in 1.8.1.1  
>> AFAIK, because it runs on SLES11.
>>
>> Cheers, Andreas
>> --
>> Andreas Dilger
>> Sr. Staff Engineer, Lustre Group
>> Sun Microsystems of Canada, Inc.
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Lustre-discuss mailing list
> Lustre-discuss at lists.lustre.org
> http://lists.lustre.org/mailman/listinfo/lustre-discuss