From nobody Mon Sep 18 05:31:46 2023 X-Original-To: freebsd-current@mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4RpthY6cpLz4tXKg; Mon, 18 Sep 2023 05:31:57 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mm@FreeBSD.org) Received: from www541.your-server.de (www541.your-server.de [213.133.107.7]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4RpthY0g7Pz4Vd5; Mon, 18 Sep 2023 05:31:57 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mm@FreeBSD.org) Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=none; spf=softfail (mx1.freebsd.org: 213.133.107.7 is neither permitted nor denied by domain of mm@FreeBSD.org) smtp.mailfrom=mm@FreeBSD.org; dmarc=none Received: from sslproxy01.your-server.de ([78.46.139.224]) by www541.your-server.de with esmtpsa (TLS1.3) tls TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1qi6rN-000OyY-1e; Mon, 18 Sep 2023 07:31:49 +0200 Received: from [188.167.171.2] (helo=[10.0.9.122]) by sslproxy01.your-server.de with esmtpsa (TLSv1.3:TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1qi6rM-000O39-E7; Mon, 18 Sep 2023 07:31:48 +0200 Message-ID: <8e4e4000-4680-0550-6772-32a6a3101761@FreeBSD.org> Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2023 07:31:46 +0200 List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Archive: https://lists.freebsd.org/archives/freebsd-current List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Sender: owner-freebsd-current@freebsd.org MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.15.1 Subject: Re: vfs.zfs.bclone_enabled (was: FreeBSD 14.0-BETA2 Now Available) Content-Language: en-US To: Alexander Motin , Graham Perrin , freebsd-current@freebsd.org Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org References: <20230916002831.GU52318@FreeBSD.org> <02c53c2e-127b-33b4-e13d-f6f6589dd5fe@gmail.com> <7a6692de-f096-637d-fe48-d5fb93e54f8b@FreeBSD.org> From: Martin Matuska In-Reply-To: <7a6692de-f096-637d-fe48-d5fb93e54f8b@FreeBSD.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Authenticated-Sender: martin@matuska.de X-Virus-Scanned: Clear (ClamAV 0.103.10/27034/Sun Sep 17 09:37:48 2023) X-Spamd-Bar: --- X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-3.19 / 15.00]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-1.00)[-1.000]; NEURAL_HAM_SHORT(-0.99)[-0.991]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW(-0.10)[78.46.139.224:received]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; ASN(0.00)[asn:24940, ipnet:213.133.96.0/19, country:DE]; RCVD_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[]; MLMMJ_DEST(0.00)[freebsd-stable@freebsd.org,freebsd-current@freebsd.org]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_SOME(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; FREEMAIL_TO(0.00)[FreeBSD.org,gmail.com,freebsd.org]; MID_RHS_MATCH_FROM(0.00)[]; R_SPF_SOFTFAIL(0.00)[~all:c]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; FREEFALL_USER(0.00)[mm]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; HAS_X_AS(0.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[4]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[]; TO_DN_SOME(0.00)[]; DMARC_NA(0.00)[freebsd.org]; ARC_NA(0.00)[] X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4RpthY0g7Pz4Vd5 I vote for enabling block cloning on main :-) mm On 16. 9. 2023 19:14, Alexander Motin wrote: > On 16.09.2023 01:25, Graham Perrin wrote: >> On 16/09/2023 01:28, Glen Barber wrote: >>> o A fix for the ZFS block_cloning feature has been implemented. >> >> Thanks >> >> I see >> , >> with >> >> in stable/14. >> >> As vfs.zfs.bclone_enabled is still 0 (at least, with 15.0-CURRENT >> n265350-72d97e1dd9cc): should we assume that additional fixes, not >> necessarily in time for 14.0-RELEASE, will be required before >> vfs.zfs.bclone_enabled can default to 1? > > I am not aware of any block cloning issues now.  All this thread about > bclone_enabled actually started after I asked why it is still > disabled. Thanks to Mark Millard for spotting this issue I could fix, > but now we are back at the point of re-enabling it again.  Since the > tunable does not even exist anywhere outside of FreeBSD base tree, I'd > propose to give this code another try here too.  I see no point to > have it disabled at least in main unless somebody needs time to run > some specific tests first. >