Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2023 19:27:47 -0800 From: Rick Macklem <rick.macklem@gmail.com> To: Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> Cc: Martin Matuska <mm@freebsd.org>, Alexander Motin <mav@freebsd.org>, FreeBSD CURRENT <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>, Garrett Wollman <wollman@bimajority.org>, Mike Karels <mike@karels.net> Subject: Re: RFC: #f FreeBSD_version of #ifdef <feature> for OpenZFS pull request Message-ID: <CAM5tNy5UbgOUbhGWA49v9iv%2B2fbBrUgfs-nnKvMZMr=Lf7DzOA@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <CANCZdfpevtaY_tGbCdHyRgb5GfYthvqAoy2QO5ySfdX2_3JHrg@mail.gmail.com> References: <CAM5tNy7rJfEzMBoHe6UGLAZfpgpE-0KMsRjOkJhg1UaiAWt_vw@mail.gmail.com> <CANCZdfpevtaY_tGbCdHyRgb5GfYthvqAoy2QO5ySfdX2_3JHrg@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Thanks, I've gone with B, rick On Wed, Nov 22, 2023 at 1:30=E2=80=AFPM Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> wrote: > > > > On Wed, Nov 22, 2023, 1:24 PM Rick Macklem <rick.macklem@gmail.com> wrote= : >> >> Hi, >> >> I have a patch currently under review at D42672 that fixes visibility >> of snapshots under .zfs/snapshot for NFS clients. >> It adds a new function called vfs_exjail_clone(), which the ZFS >> code needs to use to fill in the mnt_exjail field. >> >> Since the OpenZFS code is supposed to build for 12.2 or later, >> I can see two ways of doing this: >> (A) #if on the FreeBSD_versions, which will look something like: >> >> #if (__FreeBSD_version >=3D 1300xxx && __FreeBSD_version < 1400000) || >> (__FreeBSD_version >=3D 1400yyy && __FreeBSD_version < 1400500) || >> (__FreeBSD_version >=3D 1400zzz && __FreeBSD_version < 1500000) || >> __FreeBSD_version >=3D 1500wwww >> vfs_exjail_clone(); >> #endif >> >> The problem with this one is I do not know what www, xxx, yyy and zzz ar= e >> until I have MFC'd the patch and bumped __FreeBSD_version. >> --> I cannot generate the OpenZFS pull request until after that and, >> since I am headed to Florida for a few weeks, it would be late Dece= mber >> at the earliest. >> OR >> (B) add a line like >> #define VFS_SUPPORTS_EXJAIL_CLONE 1 >> to mount.h in the patch and then: >> >> #ifdef VFS_SUPPORTS_EXJAIL_CLONE >> vfs_exjail_clone(); >> #endif >> >> The adavntage of (B) is that I can do the pull request on OpenZFS >> right away and commit the patch to main, etc as soon as possible, >> >> So, which do you think is preferred? rick >> ps: Unless D42672 gets reviewed soon, it won't really matter w.r.t. timi= ng. > > > I'd do B if I were doing this. With a comment for why I'm doing this defi= ne. Then version numbers don't matter unless we botch something badly and n= eed them as a fallback. > > Warner >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAM5tNy5UbgOUbhGWA49v9iv%2B2fbBrUgfs-nnKvMZMr=Lf7DzOA>