[DRBD-user] drbd build failure due to missing REQ_OP_WRITE_SAME symbol

[Akemi Yagi]

On Tue, 26 Jul 2022 12:31:21 -0700 Reid Wahl wrote:

On Tue, Jul 26, 2022 at 2:11 AM Christoph Böhmwalder
<christoph.boehmwalder at 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)
===================================================
Hi Reid,

RHEL 9.1 beta is out. Kernel is 5.14.0-160.el9. Since REQ_OP_WRITE_SAME
is gone like in the c9s kernel, drbd 9.x fails to build (tried with 9.1.11).

With the way things stand, when RHEL 9.1 hits the road in November, ELRepo
will not be able to build kmod-drbd9x for RHEL-9 users.

Any possible solution?

Thanks,
Akemi
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linbit.com/pipermail/drbd-user/attachments/20221027/190597fb/attachment.htm>