From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Mar 1 21:00:32 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 94083D11 for ; Sun, 1 Mar 2015 21:00:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org (kenobi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::16:76]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 69D6A37E for ; Sun, 1 Mar 2015 21:00:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: from bugs.freebsd.org ([127.0.1.118]) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.14.9/8.14.9) with ESMTP id t21L0WbC057723 for ; Sun, 1 Mar 2015 21:00:32 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@FreeBSD.org) Message-Id: <201503012100.t21L0WbC057723@kenobi.freebsd.org> From: bugzilla-noreply@FreeBSD.org To: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.org Subject: Problem reports for freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.org that need special attention X-Bugzilla-URL: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Sun, 01 Mar 2015 21:00:32 +0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 01 Mar 2015 21:00:32 -0000 To view an individual PR, use: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=(Bug Id). The following is a listing of current problems submitted by FreeBSD users, which need special attention. These represent problem reports covering all versions including experimental development code and obsolete releases. Status | Bug Id | Description ------------+-----------+--------------------------------------------------- Open | 136470 | [nfs] Cannot mount / in read-only, over NFS Open | 139651 | [nfs] mount(8): read-only remount of NFS volume d Open | 144447 | [zfs] sharenfs fsunshare() & fsshare_main() non f 3 problems total for which you should take action. From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Mar 3 04:21:27 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7DBB38C8; Tue, 3 Mar 2015 04:21:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-ig0-x22e.google.com (mail-ig0-x22e.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c05::22e]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 47BB419B1; Tue, 3 Mar 2015 04:21:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: by igbhn18 with SMTP id hn18so23437899igb.2; Mon, 02 Mar 2015 20:21:26 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=IXSXecv9KtXcKX9M74BEx/DYMDcyVLtWAPnkj3e/Coc=; b=QvSBnhD5UqL81u39pth1z+nCALwl/tAE+qW2fXjp+k2DYUDWcm1BGb2RGnJMe+4uZ3 W6I8vS9QBwvFtJswet39uVIDIoPeGEB73YGleiuZ4yp4vwSP+GQ6INLyd0iIB4dDZI0c vzumGf0WwcWLVwFte1ewISenTMj2U2d5/W5WxiitUYc5S4A19HWZs6LU1oVxuzjt7cAa mvCZP2mzOZSISOAeorwndl5dzOvIpj/iMjZCeKAFb7QADmTqfnv8VRCSMf3UmUwIcEC7 fZiWFHU0KGmswFcegot9BVKsNamIHeIFgPKHej5NyS4nRS0oczjCmXwKDgLsNzUzzly+ GxYg== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.42.28.199 with SMTP id o7mr34846394icc.23.1425356486708; Mon, 02 Mar 2015 20:21:26 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.36.111.202 with HTTP; Mon, 2 Mar 2015 20:21:26 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2015 23:21:26 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: Zoned Commands ZBC/ZAC, Shingled SMR drives, ZFS From: grarpamp To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Cc: developer@open-zfs.org, zfs-devel@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 03 Mar 2015 04:21:27 -0000 Performance, internals, and alternatives with SMR drives. https://www.usenix.org/conference/fast15/technical-sessions/presentation/aghayev http://sssl.ccs.neu.edu/skylight/ Note that "drive managed" is first gen. "Host aware" seems the ideal future state for filesystems. Also the specialization / adaptation of marketed tech to fitting roles... SMR (archive), standard HDD (middle ground), SSD (db/oltp), and RAM (extreme). From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Mar 5 17:10:15 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 169EA67E; Thu, 5 Mar 2015 17:10:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: from gate.pik.ru (gate.pik.ru [IPv6:2a03:5a00:31:40::25]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C49D1838; Thu, 5 Mar 2015 17:10:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [internal] by relay.pik.ru (Postfix) with ESMTP id 52A7810800; Thu, 5 Mar 2015 20:10:02 +0300 (MSK) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=hotplug.ru; s=mx; t=1425575403; bh=yK5uethunIEmolVnEEq6+BZngV3gkJKlbzRI6G3b5Vk=; h=Date:From:To:CC:Subject; b=TyHtmyCLp9mnoZFnfmm+tX87+TBfA1pDRG5HGxvV29yOIK/LDUos6KKglYDxWj/Lh EkHJdsI/XeYEXAnmmYdNo14KPhBRlmec/avjy/USIXwQNysFRwFnNTQMUWTiyNx1Gi imI+EUGqXxsHHaORx76VKGmvZ06S4rq2Q0v15gvM= Message-ID: <54F88DEA.2070301@hotplug.ru> Date: Thu, 05 Mar 2015 20:10:02 +0300 From: Emil Muratov User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: CAM Target over FC and UNMAP problem Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Alexander Motin X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 05 Mar 2015 17:10:15 -0000 I've got an issue with CTL UNMAP and zvol backends. Seems that UNMAP from the initiator passed to the underlying disks (without trim support) causes IO blocking to the whole pool. Not sure where to address this problem. My setup: - plain SATA 7.2 krpm drives attached to Adaptec aacraid SAS controller - zfs raidz pool over plain drives, no partitioning - zvol created with volmode=dev - Qlogic ISP 2532 FC HBA in target mode - FreeBSD 10.1-STABLE #1 r279593 Create a new LUN with a zvol backend ctladm realsync off ctladm port -o on -p 5 ctladm create -b block -o file=/dev/zvol/wd/tst1 -o unmap=on -l 0 -d wd.tst1 -S tst1 Both target an initiator hosts connected to the FC fabric. Initiator is Win2012 server, actually it is a VM with RDM LUN to the guest OS. Formating, reading and writing large amounts of data (file copy/IOmeter) - so far so good. But as soon as I've tried to delete large files all IO to the LUN blocks, initiator system just iowaits. gstat on target shows that underlying disk load bumped to 100%, queue up to 10, but no iowrites actually in progress, only decent amount of ioreads. After a minute or so IO unblocks for a second or two than blocks again and so on again until all UNMAPs are done, it could take up to 5 minutes to delete 10Gb file. I can see that 'logicalused' property of a zvol shows that the deleted space was actually released. System log is filled with CTL msgs: kernel: (ctl2:isp1:0:0:3): ctlfestart: aborted command 0x12aaf4 discarded kernel: (2:5:3/3): WRITE(10). CDB: 2a 00 2f d4 74 b8 00 00 08 00 kernel: (2:5:3/3): Tag: 0x12ab24, type 1 kernel: (2:5:3/3): ctl_process_done: 96 seconds kernel: (ctl2:isp1:0:0:3): ctlfestart: aborted command 0x12afa4 discarded kernel: (ctl2:isp1:0:0:3): ctlfestart: aborted command 0x12afd4 discarded kernel: ctlfedone: got XPT_IMMEDIATE_NOTIFY status 0x36 tag 0xffffffff seq 0x121104 kernel: (ctl2:isp1:0:0:3): ctlfe_done: returning task I/O tag 0xffffffff seq 0x1210d4 I've tried to tackle some sysctls, but no success so far. vfs.zfs.vdev.bio_flush_disable: 1 vfs.zfs.vdev.bio_delete_disable: 1 vfs.zfs.trim.enabled=0 Disabling UNMAP in CTL (-o unmap=off) resolves the issue completely but than there is no space reclamation for zvol. Any hints would be appreciated. From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Mar 5 19:16:44 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A90DEF9B for ; Thu, 5 Mar 2015 19:16:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-wg0-x234.google.com (mail-wg0-x234.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c00::234]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 37424A77 for ; Thu, 5 Mar 2015 19:16:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: by wghl18 with SMTP id l18so1286258wgh.11 for ; Thu, 05 Mar 2015 11:16:41 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=sender:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject :references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=QnDj822+Kwnhf9YtGl0uMuJF+SjK//wOVsmnbXH92+k=; b=YmesJiYtDgwxZwPT2m0rKN3RViOhMCAe/wOTgT/jhLGOQZuOyUaUB+gBhj4Z7kuUt2 aLwYNdpPr4w3+0LV2npG+eWYApAVcO4ZwTwoX4Rt36d31Girhp0l6KkYI7Wz5m1O2F9v vaW6D1vw2gTs//+0Wi2OdKsuiigHPUvZAlS9CMhbfoWdesGl+KzzOImQO3dRXSczm7si 4eRONu0EMVwD6qJg7SUsIQL+UFFuSHq1Bk7cxlfRpHITOfeMFTTcw8SMB14KvmAKIt1A rIbBXdkzExDJ/GmtjRUn+NJF/SPlrOUJfkmu/kLNyRXmuN6B9fOGlmF1B9k832KE9p0O mekg== X-Received: by 10.180.12.233 with SMTP id b9mr24989471wic.49.1425583001737; Thu, 05 Mar 2015 11:16:41 -0800 (PST) Received: from mavbook.mavhome.dp.ua ([91.198.175.1]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id kj8sm11763737wjc.29.2015.03.05.11.16.40 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 05 Mar 2015 11:16:40 -0800 (PST) Sender: Alexander Motin Message-ID: <54F8AB96.6080600@FreeBSD.org> Date: Thu, 05 Mar 2015 21:16:38 +0200 From: Alexander Motin User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Emil Muratov , freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: CAM Target over FC and UNMAP problem References: <54F88DEA.2070301@hotplug.ru> In-Reply-To: <54F88DEA.2070301@hotplug.ru> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 05 Mar 2015 19:16:44 -0000 Hi. On 05.03.2015 19:10, Emil Muratov wrote: > I've got an issue with CTL UNMAP and zvol backends. > Seems that UNMAP from the initiator passed to the underlying disks > (without trim support) causes IO blocking to the whole pool. Not sure > where to address this problem. There is no direct relations between UNMAP sent to ZVOl and UNMAP/TRIM to underlying disks. ZVOL UNMAP only frees some pool space, that may later be trimmed if disks support it. > My setup: > - plain SATA 7.2 krpm drives attached to Adaptec aacraid SAS controller > - zfs raidz pool over plain drives, no partitioning > - zvol created with volmode=dev > - Qlogic ISP 2532 FC HBA in target mode > - FreeBSD 10.1-STABLE #1 r279593 > Create a new LUN with a zvol backend > > ctladm realsync off Are you sure you need this? Your data are so uncritical to ignore even explicit cache flushes? > ctladm port -o on -p 5 > ctladm create -b block -o file=/dev/zvol/wd/tst1 -o unmap=on -l 0 -d > wd.tst1 -S tst1 Just for note, this configuration can now be alternatively done via ctld and /etc/ctl.conf. > Both target an initiator hosts connected to the FC fabric. Initiator is > Win2012 server, actually it is a VM with RDM LUN to the guest OS. > Formating, reading and writing large amounts of data (file copy/IOmeter) > - so far so good. > But as soon as I've tried to delete large files all IO to the LUN > blocks, initiator system just iowaits. gstat on target shows that > underlying disk load bumped to 100%, queue up to 10, but no iowrites > actually in progress, only decent amount of ioreads. After a minute or > so IO unblocks for a second or two than blocks again and so on again > until all UNMAPs are done, it could take up to 5 minutes to delete 10Gb > file. I can see that 'logicalused' property of a zvol shows that the > deleted space was actually released. System log is filled with CTL msgs: > > > kernel: (ctl2:isp1:0:0:3): ctlfestart: aborted command 0x12aaf4 discarded > kernel: (2:5:3/3): WRITE(10). CDB: 2a 00 2f d4 74 b8 00 00 08 00 > kernel: (2:5:3/3): Tag: 0x12ab24, type 1 > kernel: (2:5:3/3): ctl_process_done: 96 seconds > kernel: (ctl2:isp1:0:0:3): ctlfestart: aborted command 0x12afa4 discarded > kernel: (ctl2:isp1:0:0:3): ctlfestart: aborted command 0x12afd4 discarded > kernel: ctlfedone: got XPT_IMMEDIATE_NOTIFY status 0x36 tag 0xffffffff > seq 0x121104 > kernel: (ctl2:isp1:0:0:3): ctlfe_done: returning task I/O tag 0xffffffff > seq 0x1210d4 > > > I've tried to tackle some sysctls, but no success so far. > > vfs.zfs.vdev.bio_flush_disable: 1 > vfs.zfs.vdev.bio_delete_disable: 1 > vfs.zfs.trim.enabled=0 > > > Disabling UNMAP in CTL (-o unmap=off) resolves the issue completely but > than there is no space reclamation for zvol. > > Any hints would be appreciated. There were number of complains on UNMAP performance in Illumos lists too. Six month ago there were some fixes committed and merged to stable/10 that substantially improved the situation. Since that time I haven't observed problems with that on my tests. What's about the large amount of reads during UNMAP, I have two guesses: 1) it may be read of metadata absent in ARC. Though I doubt that there are so much metadata to read them during several minutes. 2) if UNMAP ranges were not aligned to ZVOL block, I guess ZFS could try to read blocks that need partial "unmap". I've made experiment with unmapping 512 bytes of 8K ZVOL block, and it indeed zeroed specified 512 bytes, from SCSI perspective while it would be fine to just ignore the request. -- Alexander Motin From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Mar 5 21:36:04 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 992F86E8 for ; Thu, 5 Mar 2015 21:36:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-oi0-f42.google.com (mail-oi0-f42.google.com [209.85.218.42]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 62D1BC21 for ; Thu, 5 Mar 2015 21:36:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: by oigi138 with SMTP id i138so14278516oig.6 for ; Thu, 05 Mar 2015 13:35:57 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=mRFAhgACsy1CLx2EoKkfRcNFyKzJcDsaIGbq5e62us0=; b=SZgtOS/IP/e16S8b0YL3CW3Y2KnIwnSYmLfdk+2uz8bRWR2g20TOPEsfJhqIZoStBd odfHJ7yn3/BmptvAU4V/SOSbb5rPA8mjiMVyZGd/Afu4n8EWHe/EXFyl4qtQNifj4d2B 1prKrt2ufp2ZMWGL4JRePxKxR6KJC+fYf/rGsG83fHj6pM36Q5H+YHKDi8d81tOQ9Rr/ MhZvAkxXjKr2MGOwOW/1fMGP0XOJ060uxWvPcbP6VB+0/5m5ZMDH4n/X4BTlXFx6P9kz eKIRqncTjuGqeySoCImZHfDGE6K3S65yTW0z2rbDzRr9/IzCApHWb6jTMwmK7+RhHlqC yIZg== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQk94H0Xw0OM7Oz4kSZn6fgM+mqJhDL9FbQOcYhGfD476P5FRwGIQ1aw4j+et2zpYELMtoRl MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.202.46.138 with SMTP id u132mr8038075oiu.19.1425591357456; Thu, 05 Mar 2015 13:35:57 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.76.71.100 with HTTP; Thu, 5 Mar 2015 13:35:57 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 5 Mar 2015 15:35:57 -0600 Message-ID: Subject: Willing to do what I can to help with a decent fs for removable media... From: Todd Russell To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.18-1 X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 05 Mar 2015 21:36:04 -0000 The state of filesystem options for removable media that need to be used cross-platform is really making me crazy... to the point I have decided to do something about it. I haven't coded C in 20 years, so I have no illusions of getting into the code, but I am willing to test and I have access to all platforms since we use everything here on our campus. exFAT and FAT32 have to go. I recently wasted part of my day pulling files out of a backup due to disappearing files from an exFAT SD card. We need something with journaling... but not NTFS. Everyone wants to just call this solved with FUSE + NTFS, but there are a lot of reasons this is a bad solution. If anyone is willing to either work on UFS2 drivers for the other OSes, or get into doing further work on the ext3/4 or XFS drivers in FreeBSD, I will make time to help test and do whatever I can to make it happen. The lack of a good fs for removable media to use between FreeBSD and Linux is what has kept me from switching over from Linux. The people in the FreeBSD community have more to gain by tackling this issue, so I am willing to throw my hat in the BSD ring if there is anyone out there willing to go for it. Peace, Todd Russell Director of IT and Webmaster Saint Joseph Abbey and Seminary College 985-867-2266 985-789-4319 http://saintjosephabbey.com From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Mar 6 09:49:37 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E9AB6721; Fri, 6 Mar 2015 09:49:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: from gate.pik.ru (gate.pik.ru [141.101.202.72]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A19F2D6B; Fri, 6 Mar 2015 09:49:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [internal] by relay.pik.ru (Postfix) with ESMTP id 10B66101E0; Fri, 6 Mar 2015 12:49:31 +0300 (MSK) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=hotplug.ru; s=mx; t=1425635372; bh=p2aXqXtg7all0vH/5b9WTuIa0QxTQpoKk2OiVpKvxy4=; h=Date:From:To:Subject:References:In-Reply-To; b=UitChW6xSs9YRwhdsoCc0/nl05mzgJ4erOOiTKcl+G8XA9hWepAggy5OxRrrtpm9Y vuVVtFwHgFPsfdqD+T5FC9puggWK8ytnwGrU0KqqGmlJgZ3LECdBMjRLF7INIFiiS5 O9Q8776pnEZoq7OZNwVaAEt9NpdRJV37k5oeXH24= Message-ID: <54F9782A.90501@hotplug.ru> Date: Fri, 06 Mar 2015 12:49:30 +0300 From: Emil Muratov User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Alexander Motin , freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: CAM Target over FC and UNMAP problem References: <54F88DEA.2070301@hotplug.ru> <54F8AB96.6080600@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <54F8AB96.6080600@FreeBSD.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 06 Mar 2015 09:49:38 -0000 On 05.03.2015 22:16, Alexander Motin wrote: > Hi. > > On 05.03.2015 19:10, Emil Muratov wrote: >> I've got an issue with CTL UNMAP and zvol backends. >> Seems that UNMAP from the initiator passed to the underlying disks >> (without trim support) causes IO blocking to the whole pool. Not sure >> where to address this problem. > There is no direct relations between UNMAP sent to ZVOl and UNMAP/TRIM > to underlying disks. ZVOL UNMAP only frees some pool space, that may > later be trimmed if disks support it. So as far as I understood it must be only a zfs issue not related to CTL at all? > >> Create a new LUN with a zvol backend >> >> ctladm realsync off > Are you sure you need this? Your data are so uncritical to ignore even > explicit cache flushes? No, it's just for the test lab scenario. I'm not sure if UNMAP commands implies sync or not, so decided to take a chance, but no success anyway. > >> ctladm port -o on -p 5 >> ctladm create -b block -o file=/dev/zvol/wd/tst1 -o unmap=on -l 0 -d >> wd.tst1 -S tst1 > Just for note, this configuration can now be alternatively done via ctld > and /etc/ctl.conf. > >> But as soon as I've tried to delete large files all IO to the LUN >> blocks, initiator system just iowaits. gstat on target shows that >> underlying disk load bumped to 100%, queue up to 10, but no iowrites >> actually in progress, only decent amount of ioreads. After a minute or >> so IO unblocks for a second or two than blocks again and so on again >> until all UNMAPs are done, it could take up to 5 minutes to delete 10Gb >> file. I can see that 'logicalused' property of a zvol shows that the >> deleted space was actually released. System log is filled with CTL msgs: >> >> >> kernel: (ctl2:isp1:0:0:3): ctlfestart: aborted command 0x12aaf4 discarded >> kernel: (2:5:3/3): WRITE(10). CDB: 2a 00 2f d4 74 b8 00 00 08 00 >> kernel: (2:5:3/3): Tag: 0x12ab24, type 1 >> kernel: (2:5:3/3): ctl_process_done: 96 seconds >> kernel: (ctl2:isp1:0:0:3): ctlfestart: aborted command 0x12afa4 discarded >> kernel: (ctl2:isp1:0:0:3): ctlfestart: aborted command 0x12afd4 discarded >> kernel: ctlfedone: got XPT_IMMEDIATE_NOTIFY status 0x36 tag 0xffffffff >> seq 0x121104 >> kernel: (ctl2:isp1:0:0:3): ctlfe_done: returning task I/O tag 0xffffffff >> seq 0x1210d4 >> >> >> I've tried to tackle some sysctls, but no success so far. >> >> vfs.zfs.vdev.bio_flush_disable: 1 >> vfs.zfs.vdev.bio_delete_disable: 1 >> vfs.zfs.trim.enabled=0 >> >> >> Disabling UNMAP in CTL (-o unmap=off) resolves the issue completely but >> than there is no space reclamation for zvol. >> >> Any hints would be appreciated. > There were number of complains on UNMAP performance in Illumos lists > too. Six month ago there were some fixes committed and merged to > stable/10 that substantially improved the situation. Since that time I > haven't observed problems with that on my tests. Have you tried unmap on zvols with non-ssd backeds too? Now I'm actively testing this scenario, but this issues makes it impossible to use UNMAP in production, blocking timeouts turns into IO failures for initiator OS. > What's about the large amount of reads during UNMAP, I have two guesses: > 1) it may be read of metadata absent in ARC. Though I doubt that there > are so much metadata to read them during several minutes. Just to be sure I setup SSD card, made L2 ARC cache over it and set the vol properties to 'secondarycache=metadata'. Then run the tests again - acording to gstat ssd is almost idle both for reads and writes but hdds are still heavily loaded for reads. > 2) if UNMAP ranges were not aligned to ZVOL block, I guess ZFS could try > to read blocks that need partial "unmap". I've made experiment with > unmapping 512 bytes of 8K ZVOL block, and it indeed zeroed specified 512 > bytes, from SCSI perspective while it would be fine to just ignore the > request. Maybe I should take a closer look into this. Although I've tried to do best to align upper layer fs to zvol blocks, I've put GPT over LUN, win2012 should align it to 1M boundaries, than formatted NTFS partition with 8K cluster. As far as I can see during heavy writes there is no reads at the same time from the zvol, but I will do some more tests investigating this point. Besides this why there should be so a lot of reads at the first place? Isn't it enough to just update metadata to mark unmapped blocks as free? And what is the most annoying is that all IO blocks for a time, I'm not an expert in this area but isn't there any way to reorder or delay those unmap op's or even drop it out if there are a lot of other pending IOs? Will be back with more test results later. From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Mar 6 10:28:11 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3E779E94 for ; Fri, 6 Mar 2015 10:28:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-la0-x236.google.com (mail-la0-x236.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c03::236]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B014E1FF for ; Fri, 6 Mar 2015 10:28:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: by labgq15 with SMTP id gq15so2725420lab.11 for ; Fri, 06 Mar 2015 02:28:08 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=sender:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject :references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=YneFKKjbSgJu5vFUAOkYHQhI+K3j3ogb/P6FXI/GEHc=; b=sZHHnDZSlFZsPw3RCC399rCd98k4hNdyStw4M/52xCsZM7SFKmABv/d65y1JonncBy XdCkSgT9vHip8s3r+lWSwJYtTnFHHRemEWHWVTYTIKmj8rAekpe1UeH2KvompaxQ9CHO Ft1EOQ4vqEeJ1/iIwyLJB82mqhsq03BReE1qoQ0sizPdTNdmg8gqQ83KV8729fOuDPh+ 5nJWEU/6cY2TxW54eipKcc4Z95XuAdyMmXiJIiAjtSm6dFL/aOkmgdD/cJrlrgU1zRkZ RgRNCRb641idyj8yqGQ9NELRPEgVRLgrtcnQa325EPlPCdmXaBU6jo47PvUx7RVT+V2i nXRg== X-Received: by 10.112.181.41 with SMTP id dt9mr12472143lbc.56.1425637688716; Fri, 06 Mar 2015 02:28:08 -0800 (PST) Received: from mavbook.mavhome.dp.ua ([91.198.175.1]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id lf1sm1738141lab.8.2015.03.06.02.28.06 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 06 Mar 2015 02:28:07 -0800 (PST) Sender: Alexander Motin Message-ID: <54F98135.5000908@FreeBSD.org> Date: Fri, 06 Mar 2015 12:28:05 +0200 From: Alexander Motin User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Emil Muratov , freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: CAM Target over FC and UNMAP problem References: <54F88DEA.2070301@hotplug.ru> <54F8AB96.6080600@FreeBSD.org> <54F9782A.90501@hotplug.ru> In-Reply-To: <54F9782A.90501@hotplug.ru> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 06 Mar 2015 10:28:11 -0000 On 06.03.2015 11:49, Emil Muratov wrote: > On 05.03.2015 22:16, Alexander Motin wrote: >> On 05.03.2015 19:10, Emil Muratov wrote: >>> I've got an issue with CTL UNMAP and zvol backends. >>> Seems that UNMAP from the initiator passed to the underlying disks >>> (without trim support) causes IO blocking to the whole pool. Not sure >>> where to address this problem. >> There is no direct relations between UNMAP sent to ZVOl and UNMAP/TRIM >> to underlying disks. ZVOL UNMAP only frees some pool space, that may >> later be trimmed if disks support it. > So as far as I understood it must be only a zfs issue not related to CTL > at all? I think so. CTL just tells ZFS to free specified range of ZVOL, and so far nobody shown that it does it incorrectly. >> There were number of complains on UNMAP performance in Illumos lists >> too. Six month ago there were some fixes committed and merged to >> stable/10 that substantially improved the situation. Since that time I >> haven't observed problems with that on my tests. > Have you tried unmap on zvols with non-ssd backeds too? Now I'm actively > testing this scenario, but this issues makes it impossible to use UNMAP > in production, blocking timeouts turns into IO failures for initiator OS. My primary test system is indeed all-SSD. But I do some testing on HDD-based system and will do this more for UNMAP. >> What's about the large amount of reads during UNMAP, I have two guesses: >> 1) it may be read of metadata absent in ARC. Though I doubt that there >> are so much metadata to read them during several minutes. > Just to be sure I setup SSD card, made L2 ARC cache over it and set the > vol properties to 'secondarycache=metadata'. Then run the tests again - > acording to gstat ssd is almost idle both for reads and writes but hdds > are still heavily loaded for reads. L2ARC is empty on boot and filled at limited rate. You may need to read the file several times before deleting it to make metadata get into L2ARC. >> 2) if UNMAP ranges were not aligned to ZVOL block, I guess ZFS could try >> to read blocks that need partial "unmap". I've made experiment with >> unmapping 512 bytes of 8K ZVOL block, and it indeed zeroed specified 512 >> bytes, from SCSI perspective while it would be fine to just ignore the >> request. > Maybe I should take a closer look into this. Although I've tried to do > best to align upper layer fs to zvol blocks, I've put GPT over LUN, > win2012 should align it to 1M boundaries, than formatted NTFS partition > with 8K cluster. As far as I can see during heavy writes there is no > reads at the same time from the zvol, but I will do some more tests > investigating this point. You should check for reads not only during writes, but also during REwrites. If initiator actively practices UNMAP, then even misaligned initial write may not cause read-modify-write cycle, since there is just nothing to read. > Besides this why there should be so a lot of reads at the first place? > Isn't it enough to just update metadata to mark unmapped blocks as free? As I can see in ZFS code, if UNMAP is not aligned to zvol blocks, then first and last blocks are not unmapped, but instead affected parts are written with zeroes. Those partial writes may trigger read-modify-write cycle, if data are not already in cache. SCSI spec allows device to skip such zero writes, and I am thinking about implementing such filtering on CTL level. > And what is the most annoying is that all IO blocks for a time, I'm not > an expert in this area but isn't there any way to reorder or delay those > unmap op's or even drop it out if there are a lot of other pending IOs? That was not easy to do, but CTL should be clever about this now. It should now block only access to blocks that are affected by specific UNMAP command. From the other side after fixing this issue on CTL level I've noticed that in ZFS UNMAP also significantly affects performance of other commands to the same zvol. To check possible CTL role in this blocking you may try to add to your LUN configuration `option reordering unrestricted`. It makes CTL to not track any potential request collisions. If after that UNMAP will still block other I/Os, then all questions to ZFS. -- Alexander Motin From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Mar 7 03:13:23 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 52576D96 for ; Sat, 7 Mar 2015 03:13:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-pd0-x22e.google.com (mail-pd0-x22e.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c02::22e]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 27318DBA for ; Sat, 7 Mar 2015 03:13:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: by pdbnh10 with SMTP id nh10so56132726pdb.3 for ; Fri, 06 Mar 2015 19:13:22 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ycombinator.com; s=google; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=diKn8Hue12DKW+7sunRPRNAY41MpdOvEeyj0yL17bL0=; b=OlGUQy9vjqx+UalGJCYNUklFRWFJDYXoWHPVrMlYKAWrLB2mEYWSFwSv8WsaHWAtF1 +AKRFSL+BLjO+uyDHKzvmG4a/szATkT754azlAK1rowgdgwEs35+yIBdQpS598Nfwj0i rFxAzKHxzk3KRyPtZEQyVAIZK8aGcSWZjyaK0= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=diKn8Hue12DKW+7sunRPRNAY41MpdOvEeyj0yL17bL0=; b=bRWb67RsffipOF7S0cF8K3EqEOVi1WGXFtOaeOdw6fYxijkeJts2CX37z5O1651OuF g52UNXDLngQj4N2ywWeE8xc/8v0afwjjkGzWB7RRWk46V3+Dc1eMwk+5akGhVH46W1v8 sPjHWZLjcGxX90kLSEtJVAM3on7lLgVDnrvBj/LvMuK385BoONFCGGSP8F65FfzWC8DT RQY9FU9fiI6VsTJwS/tO6GuQLeGLILF2YBr/HElzoFpdyH5ONArF6AkyOOCcE00Y2Hr5 asDUKyb9U/EBmCm+sK8f4zKd7jdc+C6Wa9aNm0v2W4uV7b+4yT8p+ghDOg1+TkAuTVsY n6IQ== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQlhLriv00zMiQC5I9pVoQPBQhLStJCMrDm0jupItiWK/wqmZQTS5rj0u9f8TxOK8xKNhABC MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.66.153.36 with SMTP id vd4mr31117394pab.126.1425698002509; Fri, 06 Mar 2015 19:13:22 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.70.47.105 with HTTP; Fri, 6 Mar 2015 19:13:22 -0800 (PST) Date: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 19:13:22 -0800 Message-ID: Subject: ZFS Deadlock? From: Nick Sivo To: freebsd-fs Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 07 Mar 2015 03:13:23 -0000 Hi, One of our servers occasionally exhibits strange behavior under heavy IO load. I think, based on the output from procstat -kk -a, it may be a ZFS or VFS deadlock. Certain operations, including anything involving the ZFS commands like zfs and zpool will hang. Running ls at the root of a ZFS filesystem will also hang. Trying to access snapshots in the .zfs/ folder will hang. None of these hung processes can be killed. Eventually the machine will panic, if we don't reboot it first, but that can take days after we start seeing this issue. Strangely, our primary application (Hacker News) will keep running without interruption until the panic. Details of three occurrences can be found at https://gist.github.com/kogir/acbd6d0e28ade0ee3aac For the ones this month, it's on: 9.3-RELEASE-p10 FreeBSD 9.3-RELEASE-p10 #0: Tue Feb 24 21:28:03 UTC 2015 Those from October of last year were running an earlier 9.3 (exact version unknown). The same hardware running 9.2 was solid for months at a time. We never saw this issue on 9.2. top output from the dying box right now: last pid: 48083; load averages: 0.24, 0.31, 0.27 120 processes: 1 running, 119 sleeping CPU: 5.6% user, 0.0% nice, 1.7% system, 0.2% interrupt, 92.5% idle Mem: 5722M Active, 249M Inact, 67G Wired, 352K Cache, 51G Free ARC: 32G Total, 14G MFU, 8824M MRU, 52M Anon, 1800M Header, 7962M Other Swap: I'd show you the zpool configuration, but that would hang. We're not using L2ARC or deduplication. In any case, it's happening more frequently (twice this week), so I'd like to get to the bottom of it if I can. Does this look like it could be a filesystem issue? This will undoubtedly happen again. Is there more information I should try to collect? Thanks for your time and ideas/help you throw my way :) Best, Nick From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Mar 7 10:19:48 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2E78ABCA for ; Sat, 7 Mar 2015 10:19:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-wi0-f172.google.com (mail-wi0-f172.google.com [209.85.212.172]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B8AFC9E8 for ; Sat, 7 Mar 2015 10:19:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: by wiwl15 with SMTP id l15so8896023wiw.4 for ; Sat, 07 Mar 2015 02:19:39 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to :subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=s4yYymKU/BVWcCsl/8d47iIhlkMAYbn1rZ8Pv/sXg00=; b=LLJgFbp8Z60+r/rCA0pys+ty+FWfEcZ73296AvgjLhjbbXX97J7n1aAPr9wNRbHgfj gTW8vfnqVAHzoFb8YVggFUbFZPBW0lLawU7/1Sd1uZJf8zMZNsiOfBdXuleuptAx8G3F dKGKDqR/GPUb/3NPecu/Uch3BtdpIhrJ8s4VX6lG566fr2L+jd5meFQl5lMeueIR37HA Ih44m+UqrULN//Hf6sydrQtfguh6NLxy3Lm2Ob6DeF7XUGzQzdFIxh05BHMTszuHtvuI nOpHfMFWwSgg3SaOCN3eA6XW91dFCD81BrSCXoJJAE0VpHguH3N6OIl9O5xOwkOtwtB0 bvWg== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmruR6BOK89gAYSlcmGDgE3VqV5xqmvdwrUwiM01OKeFO4lMpgeFab6DYH9kwGVLaXOrev+ X-Received: by 10.180.39.33 with SMTP id m1mr41698981wik.26.1425723579497; Sat, 07 Mar 2015 02:19:39 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.10.1.68] (82-69-141-170.dsl.in-addr.zen.co.uk. [82.69.141.170]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id ka1sm18774143wjc.2.2015.03.07.02.19.38 for (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Sat, 07 Mar 2015 02:19:38 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <54FAD0B2.8060601@multiplay.co.uk> Date: Sat, 07 Mar 2015 10:19:30 +0000 From: Steven Hartland User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ZFS Deadlock? References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 07 Mar 2015 10:19:48 -0000 There are lots of fixes for ZFS issues in 10 so I'd recommend updated to 10.1-RELEASE to see if you issue is already resolved there. On 07/03/2015 03:13, Nick Sivo wrote: > Hi, > > One of our servers occasionally exhibits strange behavior under heavy > IO load. I think, based on the output from procstat -kk -a, it may be > a ZFS or VFS deadlock. Certain operations, including anything > involving the ZFS commands like zfs and zpool will hang. Running ls at > the root of a ZFS filesystem will also hang. Trying to access > snapshots in the .zfs/ folder will hang. None of these hung processes > can be killed. Eventually the machine will panic, if we don't reboot > it first, but that can take days after we start seeing this issue. > Strangely, our primary application (Hacker News) will keep running > without interruption until the panic. > > Details of three occurrences can be found at > https://gist.github.com/kogir/acbd6d0e28ade0ee3aac > > For the ones this month, it's on: > 9.3-RELEASE-p10 FreeBSD 9.3-RELEASE-p10 #0: Tue Feb 24 21:28:03 UTC 2015 > > Those from October of last year were running an earlier 9.3 (exact > version unknown). The same hardware running 9.2 was solid for months > at a time. We never saw this issue on 9.2. > > top output from the dying box right now: > > last pid: 48083; load averages: 0.24, 0.31, 0.27 > 120 processes: 1 running, 119 sleeping > CPU: 5.6% user, 0.0% nice, 1.7% system, 0.2% interrupt, 92.5% idle > Mem: 5722M Active, 249M Inact, 67G Wired, 352K Cache, 51G Free > ARC: 32G Total, 14G MFU, 8824M MRU, 52M Anon, 1800M Header, 7962M Other > Swap: > > I'd show you the zpool configuration, but that would hang. We're not > using L2ARC or deduplication. > > In any case, it's happening more frequently (twice this week), so I'd > like to get to the bottom of it if I can. Does this look like it could > be a filesystem issue? This will undoubtedly happen again. Is there > more information I should try to collect? > > Thanks for your time and ideas/help you throw my way :) > > Best, > Nick > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-fs@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-fs > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-fs-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Mar 7 11:05:50 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B6309BB for ; Sat, 7 Mar 2015 11:05:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: from hades.sorbs.net (mail.sorbs.net [67.231.146.200]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A402AE08 for ; Sat, 7 Mar 2015 11:05:50 +0000 (UTC) MIME-version: 1.0 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-type: text/plain; CHARSET=US-ASCII Received: from isux.com (firewall.isux.com [213.165.190.213]) by hades.sorbs.net (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 7.0.5.29.0 64bit (built Jul 9 2013)) with ESMTPSA id <0NKU002DA8BXS400@hades.sorbs.net> for freebsd-fs@freebsd.org; Sat, 07 Mar 2015 02:40:47 -0800 (PST) Message-id: <54FAD47B.7090007@sorbs.net> Date: Sat, 07 Mar 2015 11:35:39 +0100 From: Michelle Sullivan User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X; en-US; rv:1.8.1.24) Gecko/20100301 SeaMonkey/1.1.19 Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ZFS Deadlock? References: <54FAD0B2.8060601@multiplay.co.uk> In-reply-to: <54FAD0B2.8060601@multiplay.co.uk> X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 07 Mar 2015 11:05:50 -0000 Steven Hartland wrote: > There are lots of fixes for ZFS issues in 10 so I'd recommend updated > to 10.1-RELEASE to see if you issue is already resolved there. > Question is will the fixes be applied to 9.4? Will there be a 9.4? -- Michelle Sullivan http://www.mhix.org/ From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Mar 7 11:19:44 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4A6EA1C7 for ; Sat, 7 Mar 2015 11:19:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-wi0-f178.google.com (mail-wi0-f178.google.com [209.85.212.178]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D4612EDF for ; Sat, 7 Mar 2015 11:19:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: by wibbs8 with SMTP id bs8so9128760wib.0 for ; Sat, 07 Mar 2015 03:19:36 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to :subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=EwTXA8a3+fPC20lZi5MmH6wmeBKnIlORlmn8y/rEPtQ=; b=jRXcMFfUQ8z044RWxXaURXamD+9B7Zg6qvYfKy3rJT9VHHuVvV/NcLZdBW+JU64zLg iFkfuEL+MPa6OwUzytgHd7gksxei0dfKJAeKjy9Sfs+M9/Bu/vtLFEHoQC9FnxZ4tYAH 9bElp+txAL0N1/yK4nTm74ahR81Lua6WmIorWzHu5R2bQzQKSlYqdIb91hBn1f4rm4J2 RYZuaqcKdfKpbvaW1HltKzZ9EqhBvOdnpyh1pe1BcjHsERpNXAMyW/PbzV31JFD6w134 HddbwKlueZizFfvl+i3mpkxi+qdWB2h7B80ujiIadivB0ru79jdie3cc3NuVMvpjk5tc zRcQ== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQn3j+6BuDJSRJyDIZfP4fjGXvCRCr6DtjSkLQwQAhlrQ6SpzURz53DvniNmfXvSjA9BDqu+ X-Received: by 10.180.105.40 with SMTP id gj8mr86463791wib.67.1425727176526; Sat, 07 Mar 2015 03:19:36 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.10.1.68] (82-69-141-170.dsl.in-addr.zen.co.uk. [82.69.141.170]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id n6sm18965670wjy.8.2015.03.07.03.19.35 for (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Sat, 07 Mar 2015 03:19:35 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <54FADEBF.2060905@multiplay.co.uk> Date: Sat, 07 Mar 2015 11:19:27 +0000 From: Steven Hartland User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ZFS Deadlock? References: <54FAD0B2.8060601@multiplay.co.uk> <54FAD47B.7090007@sorbs.net> In-Reply-To: <54FAD47B.7090007@sorbs.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 07 Mar 2015 11:19:44 -0000 On 07/03/2015 10:35, Michelle Sullivan wrote: > Steven Hartland wrote: >> There are lots of fixes for ZFS issues in 10 so I'd recommend updated >> to 10.1-RELEASE to see if you issue is already resolved there. >> > Question is will the fixes be applied to 9.4? Will there be a 9.4? > Unlikely I now any changes I've been doing I've only been MFC'ing to 10 not 9 or 8. Regards Steve From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Mar 7 11:25:15 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6427C26D for ; Sat, 7 Mar 2015 11:25:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: from hades.sorbs.net (mail.sorbs.net [67.231.146.200]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 512B3F8E for ; Sat, 7 Mar 2015 11:25:14 +0000 (UTC) MIME-version: 1.0 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-type: text/plain; CHARSET=US-ASCII Received: from isux.com (firewall.isux.com [213.165.190.213]) by hades.sorbs.net (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 7.0.5.29.0 64bit (built Jul 9 2013)) with ESMTPSA id <0NKU0060HAMJEM00@hades.sorbs.net> for freebsd-fs@freebsd.org; Sat, 07 Mar 2015 03:30:20 -0800 (PST) Message-id: <54FAE018.8080509@sorbs.net> Date: Sat, 07 Mar 2015 12:25:12 +0100 From: Michelle Sullivan User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X; en-US; rv:1.8.1.24) Gecko/20100301 SeaMonkey/1.1.19 Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ZFS Deadlock? References: <54FAD0B2.8060601@multiplay.co.uk> <54FAD47B.7090007@sorbs.net> <54FADEBF.2060905@multiplay.co.uk> In-reply-to: <54FADEBF.2060905@multiplay.co.uk> X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 07 Mar 2015 11:25:15 -0000 Steven Hartland wrote: > > > On 07/03/2015 10:35, Michelle Sullivan wrote: >> Steven Hartland wrote: >>> There are lots of fixes for ZFS issues in 10 so I'd recommend updated >>> to 10.1-RELEASE to see if you issue is already resolved there. >>> >> Question is will the fixes be applied to 9.4? Will there be a 9.4? >> > Unlikely I now any changes I've been doing I've only been MFC'ing to > 10 not 9 or 8. I wouldn't expect 8 being that it's already at 8.4 therefore no more releases just patches... but are we not getting a 9.4? Should not the known issues that have been addresses have their fixes integrated? -- Michelle Sullivan http://www.mhix.org/ From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Mar 7 11:46:45 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5CD7E558 for ; Sat, 7 Mar 2015 11:46:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-wg0-f44.google.com (mail-wg0-f44.google.com [74.125.82.44]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E63BF1B1 for ; Sat, 7 Mar 2015 11:46:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: by wggx12 with SMTP id x12so7489454wgg.10 for ; Sat, 07 Mar 2015 03:46:36 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to :subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=hGDyXGzs9heBSjM/iisPO2zqp1i4FAFYfr2uUzxbJfg=; b=PAsCcA7UjzB/oHY1Nrv5OQ8sqsQza9HH2EzitiwQA6rkeeoQpTKCHmW6fvNH98aAjW Tzdjd5fSZ6jCK+1srALAa3ZNUtQ+CkpLbdUa8lHcrjxtEC6zTE8bemCwCxUR6P1oeF4l P3pFWI5zlwzaYA6NXedHjkZw4zBf/hhNums+ZzArtz9lxjSch3v4LjFkYpKlR+wRwXe5 wo9rna5Bu7ihylpaQH323lvK3+KxcYkQ/PoFlLnd12UHZfk56BmnvNoRNlT1aZgSIMHA wit/4GRGXo2lFpH0WDLTN2GQk+5/Q2B/darJpP8SvF8ikQ5314JO1KhpXAZwHb5AFijU aDKw== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQlMvkpUVh4Yh5K/VogMgzw/sMz7zQYlbjbeV2U7mlmGpcOQI5iiPTKMW1NS+GdNGxQYRz3X X-Received: by 10.180.208.43 with SMTP id mb11mr27972492wic.52.1425728796736; Sat, 07 Mar 2015 03:46:36 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.10.1.68] (82-69-141-170.dsl.in-addr.zen.co.uk. [82.69.141.170]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id jy7sm38237083wid.22.2015.03.07.03.46.35 for (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Sat, 07 Mar 2015 03:46:36 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <54FAE513.3030107@multiplay.co.uk> Date: Sat, 07 Mar 2015 11:46:27 +0000 From: Steven Hartland User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ZFS Deadlock? References: <54FAD0B2.8060601@multiplay.co.uk> <54FAD47B.7090007@sorbs.net> <54FADEBF.2060905@multiplay.co.uk> <54FAE018.8080509@sorbs.net> In-Reply-To: <54FAE018.8080509@sorbs.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 07 Mar 2015 11:46:45 -0000 On 07/03/2015 11:25, Michelle Sullivan wrote: > Steven Hartland wrote: >> >> On 07/03/2015 10:35, Michelle Sullivan wrote: >>> Steven Hartland wrote: >>>> There are lots of fixes for ZFS issues in 10 so I'd recommend updated >>>> to 10.1-RELEASE to see if you issue is already resolved there. >>>> >>> Question is will the fixes be applied to 9.4? Will there be a 9.4? >>> >> Unlikely I now any changes I've been doing I've only been MFC'ing to >> 10 not 9 or 8. > I wouldn't expect 8 being that it's already at 8.4 therefore no more > releases just patches... but are we not getting a 9.4? Should not the > known issues that have been addresses have their fixes integrated? > I couldn't comment on if there will be a 9.4, even if there is I wouldn't expect all the fixes that are in 10 to be present if I'm honest, the team only has so much time so prioritising the latest releases is just something that's going to have to happen. We're already had 10 and now 10.1 I'd say its time to upgrade ;-) From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Mar 7 11:52:09 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C25E1681 for ; Sat, 7 Mar 2015 11:52:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: from hades.sorbs.net (mail.sorbs.net [67.231.146.200]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AF3CE270 for ; Sat, 7 Mar 2015 11:52:09 +0000 (UTC) MIME-version: 1.0 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-type: text/plain; CHARSET=US-ASCII Received: from isux.com (firewall.isux.com [213.165.190.213]) by hades.sorbs.net (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 7.0.5.29.0 64bit (built Jul 9 2013)) with ESMTPSA id <0NKU0060PBVCEM00@hades.sorbs.net> for freebsd-fs@freebsd.org; Sat, 07 Mar 2015 03:57:14 -0800 (PST) Message-id: <54FAE666.606@sorbs.net> Date: Sat, 07 Mar 2015 12:52:06 +0100 From: Michelle Sullivan User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X; en-US; rv:1.8.1.24) Gecko/20100301 SeaMonkey/1.1.19 Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ZFS Deadlock? References: <54FAD0B2.8060601@multiplay.co.uk> <54FAD47B.7090007@sorbs.net> <54FADEBF.2060905@multiplay.co.uk> <54FAE018.8080509@sorbs.net> <54FAE513.3030107@multiplay.co.uk> In-reply-to: <54FAE513.3030107@multiplay.co.uk> X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 07 Mar 2015 11:52:09 -0000 Steven Hartland wrote: > > > On 07/03/2015 11:25, Michelle Sullivan wrote: >> Steven Hartland wrote: >>> >>> On 07/03/2015 10:35, Michelle Sullivan wrote: >>>> Steven Hartland wrote: >>>>> There are lots of fixes for ZFS issues in 10 so I'd recommend updated >>>>> to 10.1-RELEASE to see if you issue is already resolved there. >>>>> >>>> Question is will the fixes be applied to 9.4? Will there be a 9.4? >>>> >>> Unlikely I now any changes I've been doing I've only been MFC'ing to >>> 10 not 9 or 8. >> I wouldn't expect 8 being that it's already at 8.4 therefore no more >> releases just patches... but are we not getting a 9.4? Should not the >> known issues that have been addresses have their fixes integrated? >> > I couldn't comment on if there will be a 9.4, even if there is I > wouldn't expect all the fixes that are in 10 to be present if I'm > honest, the team only has so much time so prioritising the latest > releases is just something that's going to have to happen. > > We're already had 10 and now 10.1 I'd say its time to upgrade ;-) > Unfortunately 10.x is out of the question at the moment, and is likely to be for sometime. I guess we need a statement on 9.4 as there are many of us waiting for it as possibly our last FreeBSD release. -- Michelle Sullivan http://www.mhix.org/ From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Mar 7 11:55:44 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D8346710 for ; Sat, 7 Mar 2015 11:55:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-wg0-f46.google.com (mail-wg0-f46.google.com [74.125.82.46]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 65E08286 for ; Sat, 7 Mar 2015 11:55:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: by wggx12 with SMTP id x12so7494973wgg.13 for ; Sat, 07 Mar 2015 03:55:37 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to :subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=CRSRAXAPPaOZkCZz0s9N572dd4/u6R2t9YECeWrblho=; b=M4Q2Zrs9XDtsWUOMgZ+6X9ZQZ22S45b65DP4eClrqqYqD8RFeHsRDzDsDIyZZoTTNr ffJCXB/CfmM6wr3BoaFYy/CXBytQKatEq3S1kp9JEcmM8qV8VASjRT1nrUIs6w42RFim V7hTBLghi0l3oO7DBobQInTONnbML7Qg1Q3qcYS6jP8arohfx2iQhWPHS8s5mNSMJPSa VYvtx//gppoarTkvp5k5T5CqNQ5vL20ap0SKSW1rQPYoeKrU8HQhKW8SMHZqLK0CoG8+ Mt912RP/VPggapmuHHDSXsB4JrjUdqcqzheIoicZ+CY9eaSICABpjsNCntiqdfX7ZK4U yZRA== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQkx6OjykafOH841Ei24tegHj856dV8oP61ALOPtGbUBZanH1L2nO7X5t1zk9XUO4E48PJPX X-Received: by 10.180.92.136 with SMTP id cm8mr86223972wib.41.1425729336959; Sat, 07 Mar 2015 03:55:36 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.10.1.68] (82-69-141-170.dsl.in-addr.zen.co.uk. [82.69.141.170]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id e2sm19069049wjy.46.2015.03.07.03.55.35 for (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Sat, 07 Mar 2015 03:55:35 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <54FAE72F.80208@multiplay.co.uk> Date: Sat, 07 Mar 2015 11:55:27 +0000 From: Steven Hartland User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ZFS Deadlock? References: <54FAD0B2.8060601@multiplay.co.uk> <54FAD47B.7090007@sorbs.net> <54FADEBF.2060905@multiplay.co.uk> <54FAE018.8080509@sorbs.net> <54FAE513.3030107@multiplay.co.uk> <54FAE666.606@sorbs.net> In-Reply-To: <54FAE666.606@sorbs.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 07 Mar 2015 11:55:44 -0000 On 07/03/2015 11:52, Michelle Sullivan wrote: > Unfortunately 10.x is out of the question at the moment, and is likely > to be for sometime. I guess we need a statement on 9.4 as there are > many of us waiting for it as possibly our last FreeBSD release. Out of interest why is that? From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Mar 7 13:12:34 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B17A01D8 for ; Sat, 7 Mar 2015 13:12:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org (kenobi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::16:76]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 97D16B8F for ; Sat, 7 Mar 2015 13:12:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: from bugs.freebsd.org ([127.0.1.118]) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.14.9/8.14.9) with ESMTP id t27DCYno024998 for ; Sat, 7 Mar 2015 13:12:34 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 193749] ZFS libzpool_core feature request Date: Sat, 07 Mar 2015 13:12:34 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: AssignedTo X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: Base System X-Bugzilla-Component: kern X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.0-RELEASE X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: Affects Some People X-Bugzilla-Who: linimon@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Status: New X-Bugzilla-Priority: --- X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: --- X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: short_desc component assigned_to Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Bugzilla-URL: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 07 Mar 2015 13:12:34 -0000 https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=193749 Mark Linimon changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Summary|ZFS libzpool_core |ZFS libzpool_core feature | |request Component|misc |kern Assignee|freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.org |freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.org -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug. From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Mar 7 13:13:13 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0047928F for ; Sat, 7 Mar 2015 13:13:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org (kenobi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::16:76]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DA2D2B9A for ; Sat, 7 Mar 2015 13:13:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: from bugs.freebsd.org ([127.0.1.118]) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.14.9/8.14.9) with ESMTP id t27DDCIX025286 for ; Sat, 7 Mar 2015 13:13:12 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 193748] Userland support for libzfs and libzfs_core feature request Date: Sat, 07 Mar 2015 13:13:12 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: AssignedTo X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: Base System X-Bugzilla-Component: kern X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.0-RELEASE X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: Affects Some People X-Bugzilla-Who: linimon@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Status: New X-Bugzilla-Priority: --- X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: --- X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: component assigned_to short_desc Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Bugzilla-URL: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 07 Mar 2015 13:13:13 -0000 https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=193748 Mark Linimon changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Component|misc |kern Assignee|freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.org |freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.org Summary|Userland support for libzfs |Userland support for libzfs |and libzfs_core |and libzfs_core feature | |request -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug. From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Mar 7 13:15:23 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 17EE74CC for ; Sat, 7 Mar 2015 13:15:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org (kenobi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::16:76]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F2278BC0 for ; Sat, 7 Mar 2015 13:15:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: from bugs.freebsd.org ([127.0.1.118]) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.14.9/8.14.9) with ESMTP id t27DFMqv026673 for ; Sat, 7 Mar 2015 13:15:22 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 190462] request: don't active feature flags when upgrading zfs pool Date: Sat, 07 Mar 2015 13:15:22 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: AssignedTo X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: Base System X-Bugzilla-Component: kern X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.0-STABLE X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: Affects Only Me X-Bugzilla-Who: linimon@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Status: New X-Bugzilla-Priority: --- X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: --- X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: component short_desc assigned_to Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Bugzilla-URL: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 07 Mar 2015 13:15:23 -0000 https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=190462 Mark Linimon changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Component|misc |kern Summary|don't active feature flags |request: don't active |when upgrading pool |feature flags when | |upgrading zfs pool Assignee|freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.org |freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.org -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug. From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Mar 7 14:16:27 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6A566EB8 for ; Sat, 7 Mar 2015 14:16:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org (kenobi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::16:76]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4FCD7351 for ; Sat, 7 Mar 2015 14:16:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from bugs.freebsd.org ([127.0.1.118]) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.14.9/8.14.9) with ESMTP id t27EGRWo017694 for ; Sat, 7 Mar 2015 14:16:27 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 196318] [msdosfs] can't mount 4096 byte sector MSDOS formatted drive Date: Sat, 07 Mar 2015 14:16:27 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: AssignedTo X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: Base System X-Bugzilla-Component: kern X-Bugzilla-Version: 11.0-CURRENT X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: Affects Only Me X-Bugzilla-Who: linimon@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Status: New X-Bugzilla-Priority: --- X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: --- X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: assigned_to Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Bugzilla-URL: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 07 Mar 2015 14:16:27 -0000 https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=196318 Mark Linimon changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Assignee|freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.org |freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.org -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug. From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Mar 7 14:33:38 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4CAD4102 for ; Sat, 7 Mar 2015 14:33:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: from nm31-vm1.bullet.mail.bf1.yahoo.com (nm31-vm1.bullet.mail.bf1.yahoo.com [72.30.239.9]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EC56C6C6 for ; Sat, 7 Mar 2015 14:33:37 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yahoo.com; s=s2048; t=1425738675; bh=gB5DfjDxwiVbj5ewa2JzayQ5Ubdm2kbyzTJc9siCRfk=; h=Date:From:To:Subject:From:Subject; b=MtZeEoM2EkvW0Fr7E+vBLdy6m1R6tNqSCnuJfIHJZTd4Jq2yxe3s5a8Tusv9sGDTFbw08DD3uIo5UXWRKLiD/KUlgVL1mrWyohuMtyPuzvXO0mOzye2QmmBueqCFcVQ3T9hzoKR9kxthZ3/JVVMqrCEPwVdcVAPzwhoXv9s+G1AUHcUb4aqpROL9i5L7Dpagq/IswzXFmjr00VT1j/2cZ4eJe3E4AQp/fRXRV48TEUy7c/YhEnty9OvNWErYSPYvNPWTyteXURJ+Lg89miMSuIrcQ4D9vOuEo3kWTBM95gq+S0751dm4qrg5w+3yXCdvDXc3iw0ixl+u6z3QazJThA== Received: from [98.139.214.32] by nm31.bullet.mail.bf1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 07 Mar 2015 14:31:15 -0000 Received: from [98.139.213.11] by tm15.bullet.mail.bf1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 07 Mar 2015 14:31:15 -0000 Received: from [127.0.0.1] by smtp111.mail.bf1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 07 Mar 2015 14:31:15 -0000 X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 368352.60702.bm@smtp111.mail.bf1.yahoo.com X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3 X-YMail-OSG: EfbUorgVM1lhCPFtRKN0gMYbEmfoPCOkqZceJBWu3z9bwoI KWBX.yQOYCraK1xFhFa5aPMiqHQQOAAzrE491929vtVL_q7Jsx3ZGC1t8ksn pFaRDj1A8dsDJEVGYlDQyF6ghSecTaZAPbJIPacUgFMeqz7feOJvZLoqW_Sc LQPW6MT9PF2LzxQLqT67RCtG7GaNBj3rs5aKidnxuoPFL2of4qp6Fb97Dj1I TNP.8FVNJmO9x9mDti73S1sEQi0vXx5SDqkAt6CQ0sk91WIuC0QhDhi2vHjx OA522Ie0bPdbm5Rcetl399gAeBjugPrKEhxxojleNenvHpwpN6FyoC0UEPmR NXoJCOeRb6FH5e.ewiIPWpnkTQ2vw8FALqy69sbzsem2eW7_Jvcx5qAq3hPv 8u09lPD2P2fbbrWYSSu4jW2mBv2oIGpMUT8MkA_z8YNJbYbwBC4y5uMG2320 0sAsKSSr8xiDW0pAmh8kK893jtpxUbyzkzdFRxHGut1VkPtlnjmXC0_yjjg5 .7oed2XlBByQ4BRlLU.MRZ7jMjqtA8.o- X-Yahoo-SMTP: xcjD0guswBAZaPPIbxpWwLcp9Unf Message-ID: <54FB0BBE.7060907@FreeBSD.org> Date: Sat, 07 Mar 2015 09:31:26 -0500 From: Pedro Giffuni Organization: FreeBSD Project User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org, Todd Russell Subject: Re: Willing to do what I can to help with a decent fs for removable media... Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 07 Mar 2015 14:33:38 -0000 Hi Todd; What is wrong with ext2/3 ? OK, we don't support journalling but I doubt you really need that for removable media. Regards, Pedro. From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Mar 7 15:12:00 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C189DC12 for ; Sat, 7 Mar 2015 15:12:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org (kenobi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::16:76]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A6F17C02 for ; Sat, 7 Mar 2015 15:12:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: from bugs.freebsd.org ([127.0.1.118]) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.14.9/8.14.9) with ESMTP id t27FC0v3022556 for ; Sat, 7 Mar 2015 15:12:00 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 187094] [nfs] [patch] Support DHCP option for jumbo frames on PXE/BOOTP interface Date: Sat, 07 Mar 2015 15:12:00 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: AssignedTo X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: Base System X-Bugzilla-Component: kern X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.1-RELEASE X-Bugzilla-Keywords: patch X-Bugzilla-Severity: Affects Some People X-Bugzilla-Who: linimon@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Status: In Progress X-Bugzilla-Priority: Normal X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: --- X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: assigned_to keywords Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Bugzilla-URL: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 07 Mar 2015 15:12:00 -0000 https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187094 Mark Linimon changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Assignee|freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.org |freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.org Keywords| |patch -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug. From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Mar 7 15:14:55 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 03A9FCF0 for ; Sat, 7 Mar 2015 15:14:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org (kenobi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::16:76]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DE47AC1C for ; Sat, 7 Mar 2015 15:14:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: from bugs.freebsd.org ([127.0.1.118]) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.14.9/8.14.9) with ESMTP id t27FEsa0036131 for ; Sat, 7 Mar 2015 15:14:54 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 198313] UFS write becomes very slow in some cases Date: Sat, 07 Mar 2015 15:14:54 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: AssignedTo X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: Base System X-Bugzilla-Component: kern X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.1-STABLE X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: Affects Many People X-Bugzilla-Who: linimon@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Status: New X-Bugzilla-Priority: --- X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: --- X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: assigned_to Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Bugzilla-URL: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 07 Mar 2015 15:14:55 -0000 https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=198313 Mark Linimon changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Assignee|freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.org |freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.org -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug. From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Mar 7 15:15:03 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6FBE5DA0 for ; Sat, 7 Mar 2015 15:15:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org (kenobi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::16:76]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4E55DC1F for ; Sat, 7 Mar 2015 15:15:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: from bugs.freebsd.org ([127.0.1.118]) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.14.9/8.14.9) with ESMTP id t27FF3ed036810 for ; Sat, 7 Mar 2015 15:15:03 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 198242] [zfs] L2ARC degraded. Checksum errors, I/O errors Date: Sat, 07 Mar 2015 15:15:03 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: AssignedTo X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: Base System X-Bugzilla-Component: kern X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.1-RELEASE X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: Affects Some People X-Bugzilla-Who: linimon@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Status: New X-Bugzilla-Priority: --- X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: --- X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: assigned_to Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Bugzilla-URL: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 07 Mar 2015 15:15:03 -0000 https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=198242 Mark Linimon changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Assignee|freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.org |freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.org -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug. From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Mar 7 15:15:15 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6FAB7E5A for ; Sat, 7 Mar 2015 15:15:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org (kenobi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::16:76]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5599DC2C for ; Sat, 7 Mar 2015 15:15:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: from bugs.freebsd.org ([127.0.1.118]) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.14.9/8.14.9) with ESMTP id t27FFFai037077 for ; Sat, 7 Mar 2015 15:15:15 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 198228] zfs loader failed to load kernel from degraded mirror (disk with SMART errors) Date: Sat, 07 Mar 2015 15:15:15 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: AssignedTo X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: Base System X-Bugzilla-Component: kern X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.1-RELEASE X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: Affects Only Me X-Bugzilla-Who: linimon@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Status: New X-Bugzilla-Priority: --- X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: --- X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: assigned_to Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Bugzilla-URL: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 07 Mar 2015 15:15:15 -0000 https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=198228 Mark Linimon changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Assignee|freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.org |freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.org -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug. From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Mar 7 15:25:53 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 54492AEA for ; Sat, 7 Mar 2015 15:25:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org (kenobi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::16:76]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3AE75DB0 for ; Sat, 7 Mar 2015 15:25:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: from bugs.freebsd.org ([127.0.1.118]) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.14.9/8.14.9) with ESMTP id t27FPrtI046768 for ; Sat, 7 Mar 2015 15:25:53 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 195746] zfs L2ARC wrong alloc/free size Date: Sat, 07 Mar 2015 15:25:51 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: AssignedTo X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: Base System X-Bugzilla-Component: kern X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.1-RELEASE X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: Affects Some People X-Bugzilla-Who: linimon@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Status: New X-Bugzilla-Priority: --- X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: --- X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: assigned_to Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Bugzilla-URL: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 07 Mar 2015 15:25:53 -0000 https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=195746 Mark Linimon changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Assignee|freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.org |freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.org -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug. From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Mar 7 15:26:06 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1C4ADB99 for ; Sat, 7 Mar 2015 15:26:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org (kenobi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::16:76]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 02B5DDB8 for ; Sat, 7 Mar 2015 15:26:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from bugs.freebsd.org ([127.0.1.118]) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.14.9/8.14.9) with ESMTP id t27FQ5Rn046831 for ; Sat, 7 Mar 2015 15:26:05 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 195565] [zfs] zpool import always dumps core Date: Sat, 07 Mar 2015 15:26:06 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: AssignedTo X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: Base System X-Bugzilla-Component: kern X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.1-RELEASE X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: Affects Only Me X-Bugzilla-Who: linimon@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Status: New X-Bugzilla-Priority: --- X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: --- X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: assigned_to Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Bugzilla-URL: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 07 Mar 2015 15:26:06 -0000 https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=195565 Mark Linimon changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Assignee|freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.org |freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.org -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug. From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Mar 7 17:09:32 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C2F25750 for ; Sat, 7 Mar 2015 17:09:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: from hades.sorbs.net (mail.sorbs.net [67.231.146.200]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AF272A01 for ; Sat, 7 Mar 2015 17:09:31 +0000 (UTC) MIME-version: 1.0 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-type: text/plain; CHARSET=US-ASCII Received: from isux.com (firewall.isux.com [213.165.190.213]) by hades.sorbs.net (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 7.0.5.29.0 64bit (built Jul 9 2013)) with ESMTPSA id <0NKU0063TQKBEM00@hades.sorbs.net> for freebsd-fs@freebsd.org; Sat, 07 Mar 2015 09:14:36 -0800 (PST) Message-id: <54FB30C8.6000902@sorbs.net> Date: Sat, 07 Mar 2015 18:09:28 +0100 From: Michelle Sullivan User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X; en-US; rv:1.8.1.24) Gecko/20100301 SeaMonkey/1.1.19 To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ZFS Deadlock? References: <54FAD0B2.8060601@multiplay.co.uk> <54FAD47B.7090007@sorbs.net> <54FADEBF.2060905@multiplay.co.uk> <54FAE018.8080509@sorbs.net> <54FAE513.3030107@multiplay.co.uk> <54FAE666.606@sorbs.net> <54FAE72F.80208@multiplay.co.uk> In-reply-to: <54FAE72F.80208@multiplay.co.uk> X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 07 Mar 2015 17:09:32 -0000 Steven Hartland wrote: > > > On 07/03/2015 11:52, Michelle Sullivan wrote: >> Unfortunately 10.x is out of the question at the moment, and is >> likely to be for sometime. I guess we need a statement on 9.4 as >> there are many of us waiting for it as possibly our last FreeBSD >> release. > Out of interest why is that? My previous posts tell the story. Not going into it again... Except I've been burned now more times by FreeBSD than I ever have on Linux (and I'm not the only one.) -- Michelle Sullivan http://www.mhix.org/ From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Mar 7 22:54:02 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1AB8E75 for ; Sat, 7 Mar 2015 22:54:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-pd0-x236.google.com (mail-pd0-x236.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c02::236]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DD9D591 for ; Sat, 7 Mar 2015 22:54:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: by pdev10 with SMTP id v10so24308766pde.13 for ; Sat, 07 Mar 2015 14:54:01 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ycombinator.com; s=google; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=ZiwimysLfOBemF9SKGjjvT9zQHV+pEIzXnc1BHYuuUE=; b=RqJsb+63B3dHVTf4nKVOJwlx0uEADBDzuUsfU+kiAgSYl2ghRUBN0pjFbrL1eB7PNP tUvpchvOgho/3KwiOE0aGBT1gJ1z8QKghf1+qI9dBBiU7cfecdO+efJzKhomQAxI/NJb b/W1nqR2OO4IAS1iYI3StMQ21wxqDNgJ1/yfM= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=ZiwimysLfOBemF9SKGjjvT9zQHV+pEIzXnc1BHYuuUE=; b=PHDmVxJA2uzs3Oofjdm91uE2PAjMm3hFKM5SF65dmmMtyr7kvUPv+OYiSzqhnmFiVZ f+N4vFBFQZinYmFsHUBlOg/wpuSRsC+Rf1wzgRBumzLjDlhcWNAodNnuHnUxd/KoQRAZ BvxvPXczWmCAsGcRGnLkob/faV7jDrWiHfqWLancCQyyvvmNs90qCG02xjOY6QmgVrSp OqTEKZQfpSduJpFBEhh4/4rk500dE2tn7PzruKPJWq8KosAob1sr7fChVLPAWnRRgMVV 1dnT298xv/zRQ0sPQgf8p3w625VzBrD7DHYFBf98QimYHVmXHJ7jlP1c1sh3c2twDJ9o ov/w== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQlgtd0rzR0f7ry1THMdZd49bHjATtkjSc8AQb1SuOT/XM7vIwyAyB0bNU4oZc2f6t/evKRb MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.68.215.65 with SMTP id og1mr38195321pbc.79.1425768841107; Sat, 07 Mar 2015 14:54:01 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.70.47.105 with HTTP; Sat, 7 Mar 2015 14:54:00 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <54FAE513.3030107@multiplay.co.uk> References: <54FAD0B2.8060601@multiplay.co.uk> <54FAD47B.7090007@sorbs.net> <54FADEBF.2060905@multiplay.co.uk> <54FAE018.8080509@sorbs.net> <54FAE513.3030107@multiplay.co.uk> Date: Sat, 7 Mar 2015 14:54:00 -0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: ZFS Deadlock? From: Nick Sivo To: Steven Hartland Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Cc: freebsd-fs X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 07 Mar 2015 22:54:02 -0000 Unfortunately in our case we can't easily upgrade to 10 or 10.1 because Racket (6.1.1) on them isn't stable and core dumps. Fixing Racket trunk on FreeBSD 10+ was not the next step I expected, especially since 9.3 is still considered "supported" for nearly two more years. Not what I wanted to hear, but good to know regardless. Thanks! -Nick On Sat, Mar 7, 2015 at 3:46 AM, Steven Hartland wrote: > > > On 07/03/2015 11:25, Michelle Sullivan wrote: >> >> Steven Hartland wrote: >>> >>> >>> On 07/03/2015 10:35, Michelle Sullivan wrote: >>>> >>>> Steven Hartland wrote: >>>>> >>>>> There are lots of fixes for ZFS issues in 10 so I'd recommend updated >>>>> to 10.1-RELEASE to see if you issue is already resolved there. >>>>> >>>> Question is will the fixes be applied to 9.4? Will there be a 9.4? >>>> >>> Unlikely I now any changes I've been doing I've only been MFC'ing to >>> 10 not 9 or 8. >> >> I wouldn't expect 8 being that it's already at 8.4 therefore no more >> releases just patches... but are we not getting a 9.4? Should not the >> known issues that have been addresses have their fixes integrated? >> > I couldn't comment on if there will be a 9.4, even if there is I wouldn't > expect all the fixes that are in 10 to be present if I'm honest, the team > only has so much time so prioritising the latest releases is just something > that's going to have to happen. > > We're already had 10 and now 10.1 I'd say its time to upgrade ;-) > > > > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-fs@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-fs > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-fs-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"