[DRBD-user] drbd build failure due to missing REQ_OP_WRITE_SAME symbol
christoph.boehmwalder at linbit.com
Tue Jul 26 11:11:01 CEST 2022
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.
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.
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
... and this is why we'll all be happy when DRBD is finally *only* in
the upstream kernel again :)
LINBIT | Keeping the Digital World Running
DRBD HA — Disaster Recovery — Software defined Storage
More information about the drbd-user