On Tue, Jul 26, 2022 at 2:11 AM Christoph Böhmwalder <christoph.boehmwal...@linbit.com> wrote: > > Am 26.07.22 um 03:24 schrieb Reid Wahl: > > drbd_csum_bio() in drbd_sender.c uses a constant (REQ_OP_WRITE_SAME) > > that was removed from the kernel in February: > > - https://github.com/LINBIT/drbd/blob/drbd-9.1/drbd/drbd_sender.c#L360-L361 > > > > Here's where the constant was removed: > > - > > https://github.com/torvalds/linux/commit/73bd66d9#diff-3b0e31d21eab4c9595b9d14730e06067f27b9f21134edcd9cb47215d23d69583 > > > > I'm using CentOS Stream 9 with kernel-5.14.0-130.el9.x86_64. I'm aware > > that CentOS Stream "is not one of the distributions we care about too > > deeply." I'm not sure to what extent we care about it though. It would > > be nice to be able to build from the latest drbd upstream using a > > recent kernel. > > > > Please let me know if this is something we can get fixed. > > > > Hi Reid, > > it's not only about caring, this is mostly an issue of time. Basically, > we race to support the "important" kernels (i.e. the ones our paying > customers request), but that takes up a lot of time already, so there is > not a lot left for more "exotic" kernels. > > Whenever we are already compatible with the most recent "customer > relevant kernel", I just start going through the remaining patches in > chronological order. If they are easy to port, they get done pretty > quickly. If they are more convoluted (like the recent bio_alloc mess), > it might take more time. > What I'm trying to say is that it's tough to even give a rough estimate > on when a specific patch will get ported to out-of-tree.
I appreciate the detailed response. I completely get the need to prioritize stable/important kernels. > > The only thing I can share – if it provides any solace – is that the > patch you are referencing is currently #3 in the queue, so it will > possibly get done in the near future. Again, unfortunately I can't make > any promises. It's not that big of a deal :) However one may feel about CentOS's direction, users of Stream have to expect that behavior may not always be smooth. I've been updating some documentation that was written for Centos 8 Stream (c8s), and thus far I've been unable to make drbd work on c9s. The kmod-drbd9x RPM package from ELRepo isn't compatible (and won't be made compatible) with the c9s kernel. The latest stable drbd release tarball hits a bio_alloc issue (and possibly others). The current git drbd requires that I build my own coccinelle/spatch (no RPM package for EL9), but after I do that, I hit the REQ_OP_WRITE_SAME issue from the first message. We're just going to have to use Alma Linux in place of c9s. > > ... and this is why we'll all be happy when DRBD is finally *only* in > the upstream kernel again :) > > -- > Christoph Böhmwalder > LINBIT | Keeping the Digital World Running > DRBD HA — Disaster Recovery — Software defined Storage > -- Regards, Reid Wahl (He/Him) Senior Software Engineer, Red Hat RHEL High Availability - Pacemaker _______________________________________________ Star us on GITHUB: https://github.com/LINBIT drbd-user mailing list drbd-user@lists.linbit.com https://lists.linbit.com/mailman/listinfo/drbd-user