Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

DAOS-7092 object: define more object classes (#5075) #5194

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Mar 29, 2021

Conversation

gnailzenh
Copy link
Contributor

  • Add definitions for all object class IDs
  • Use macros for object class definition to reduce duplicated code
  • Move object definitions to a separate file
  • Add 4-replica object class IDs
  • Remove EC(3+1) because nobody uses it
  • Jump_map returns error of oclass with large layout, instead of
    decreasing layout silently
  • A few fixes for jump_pl_map test, also reduce test scope of
    all_healthy, because way more classes are added by this patch.

Signed-off-by: Liang Zhen liang.zhen@intel.com

- Add definitions for all object class IDs
- Use macros for object class definition to reduce duplicated code
- Move object definitions to a separate file
- Add 4-replica object class IDs
- Remove EC(3+1) because nobody uses it
- Jump_map returns error of oclass with large layout, instead of
  decreasing layout silently
- A few fixes for jump_pl_map test, also reduce test scope of
  all_healthy, because way more classes are added by this patch.

Signed-off-by: Liang Zhen <liang.zhen@intel.com>
Copy link
Collaborator

@daosbuild1 daosbuild1 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM. No errors found by checkpatch.

@gnailzenh gnailzenh requested review from liuxuezhao and wangdi1 March 29, 2021 04:29
@gnailzenh gnailzenh requested a review from mchaarawi March 29, 2021 15:40
@gnailzenh gnailzenh merged commit e5cde1d into release/1.2 Mar 29, 2021
@gnailzenh gnailzenh deleted the liang/b1_2_oclass_def branch March 29, 2021 15:56
@ashleypittman ashleypittman mentioned this pull request Apr 28, 2021
@ashleypittman ashleypittman mentioned this pull request May 20, 2021
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants