Re: [HPDD-discuss] [cdwg] Lustre 2.6 update - March 28th 2014
by Jones, Peter A
Sure. I can do that going forward.
On 4/2/14, 7:02 AM, "Cory Spitz" <spitzcor(a)cray.com> wrote:
>Hi,
>
>Peter wrote:
>> PS/ You can also keep up to date with matters relating to the 2.6
>>release on the CDWG wiki -
>> http://wiki.opensfs.org/Lustre_2.6.0
>
>Peter, would it be too much trouble to attach these updates to that
>Lustre_2.6.0 wiki page?
>
>Thanks,
>-Cory
>
>
>
>
>On 3/28/14, 9:26 AM, "Jones, Peter A" <peter.a.jones(a)intel.com> wrote:
>
>>Hi there
>>
>>Here is an update on the Lustre 2.6 release.
>>
>>Landings
>>========
>>
>>-A number of landings made
>>http://git.whamcloud.com/?p=fs/lustre-release.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads
>>/
>>master
>>
>>Testing
>>=======
>>
>>-Testing has completed on the 2.5.56 tag; testing on the 2.5.57 tag is
>>underway
>>
>>Blockers
>>========
>>
>>-https://jira.hpdd.intel.com/issues/?filter=10944<https://jira.hpdd.intel
>>.
>>com/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20LU%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%20%22Lustre%2
>>0
>>2.6.0%22%20AND%20resolution%20%3D%20Unresolved%20AND%20priority%20%3D%20B
>>l
>>ocker%20ORDER%20BY%20key%20DESC>
>>-If there are any issues not presently marked as blockers that you
>>believe should be, please let me know
>>
>>Other
>>=====
>>
>>-Feature freeze is now in effect for 2.6 and we are in the stabilization
>>period, focusing on testing and bug fixing
>>
>>Thanks
>>
>>Peter
>>
>>PS/ You can also keep up to date with matters relating to the 2.6 release
>>on the CDWG wiki - http://wiki.opensfs.org/Lustre_2.6.0
>>
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>HPDD-discuss mailing list
>>HPDD-discuss(a)lists.01.org
>>https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/hpdd-discuss
>
>_______________________________________________
>cdwg mailing list
>cdwg(a)lists.opensfs.org
>http://lists.opensfs.org/listinfo.cgi/cdwg-opensfs.org
8 years, 1 month
Re: [HPDD-discuss] Lustre 2.6 update - March 28th 2014
by Cory Spitz
Hi,
Peter wrote:
> PS/ You can also keep up to date with matters relating to the 2.6
>release on the CDWG wiki -
> http://wiki.opensfs.org/Lustre_2.6.0
Peter, would it be too much trouble to attach these updates to that
Lustre_2.6.0 wiki page?
Thanks,
-Cory
On 3/28/14, 9:26 AM, "Jones, Peter A" <peter.a.jones(a)intel.com> wrote:
>Hi there
>
>Here is an update on the Lustre 2.6 release.
>
>Landings
>========
>
>-A number of landings made
>http://git.whamcloud.com/?p=fs/lustre-release.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/
>master
>
>Testing
>=======
>
>-Testing has completed on the 2.5.56 tag; testing on the 2.5.57 tag is
>underway
>
>Blockers
>========
>
>-https://jira.hpdd.intel.com/issues/?filter=10944<https://jira.hpdd.intel.
>com/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20LU%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%20%22Lustre%20
>2.6.0%22%20AND%20resolution%20%3D%20Unresolved%20AND%20priority%20%3D%20Bl
>ocker%20ORDER%20BY%20key%20DESC>
>-If there are any issues not presently marked as blockers that you
>believe should be, please let me know
>
>Other
>=====
>
>-Feature freeze is now in effect for 2.6 and we are in the stabilization
>period, focusing on testing and bug fixing
>
>Thanks
>
>Peter
>
>PS/ You can also keep up to date with matters relating to the 2.6 release
>on the CDWG wiki - http://wiki.opensfs.org/Lustre_2.6.0
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>HPDD-discuss mailing list
>HPDD-discuss(a)lists.01.org
>https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/hpdd-discuss
8 years, 1 month
Lustre Servers - Disable SELinux in build
by Patrick Farrell
We at Cray recently noticed that on CentOS 6.4/5 servers even with
SELinux disabled there is still a noticeable amount of memory in use:
cat /proc/slabinfo | grep selinux
selinux_inode_security 7578 7579 72 53 1 : tunables 120
60 0 : slabdata 143 143 0
That's from an idle server, and it's not much usage (7579 objects, 72
bytes per object, ~ 0.5 MB of memory), but on an active server, there
can be millions of objects, leading to a few hundred MB of memory usage.
As far as I can tell, disabling selinux is required for Lustre servers
to function. When the kernel is built with SELinux disabled in the
.config, this memory usage goes away.
I'd like to propose changing the Lustre provided RHEL kernel config file
to not build SELINUX in to the kernel.
This won't affect clients unless they're running the patched kernel -
only the patched Lustre server kernels are changed by this, and as far
as I know, servers always have SELinux disabled.
I wanted to float this to a broad audience and get any objections before
creating an LU and pushing a patch to Gerrit. Does anyone have a reason
not to do this?
Thanks,
- Patrick Farrell
Patch, in essence:
--- kernel-2.6.32-2.6-rhel6-x86_64.config
+++ kernel-2.6.32-2.6-rhel6-x86_64.config
@@ -4411,15 +4411,7 @@
CONFIG_SECURITY_FILE_CAPABILITIES=y
# CONFIG_SECURITY_ROOTPLUG is not set
CONFIG_INTEL_TXT=y
-CONFIG_LSM_MMAP_MIN_ADDR=65535
-CONFIG_SECURITY_SELINUX=y
-CONFIG_SECURITY_SELINUX_BOOTPARAM=y
-CONFIG_SECURITY_SELINUX_BOOTPARAM_VALUE=1
-CONFIG_SECURITY_SELINUX_DISABLE=y
-CONFIG_SECURITY_SELINUX_DEVELOP=y
-CONFIG_SECURITY_SELINUX_AVC_STATS=y
-CONFIG_SECURITY_SELINUX_CHECKREQPROT_VALUE=1
-# CONFIG_SECURITY_SELINUX_POLICYDB_VERSION_MAX is not set
+# CONFIG_SECURITY_SELINUX is not set
# CONFIG_SECURITY_SMACK is not set
# CONFIG_SECURITY_TOMOYO is not set
CONFIG_IMA=y
8 years, 1 month
