From owner-freebsd-fs@freebsd.org  Mon Sep 14 05:27:28 2015
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-fs@freebsd.org>
Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org
 [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1])
 by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 90600A03D54
 for <freebsd-fs@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org>; Mon, 14 Sep 2015 05:27:28 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from janm@transactionware.com)
Received: from mail3.transactionware.com (mail.transactionware.com
 [203.14.245.7]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id EF4F011D6
 for <freebsd-fs@freebsd.org>; Mon, 14 Sep 2015 05:27:26 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from janm@transactionware.com)
Received: (qmail 84582 invoked by uid 907); 14 Sep 2015 05:27:22 -0000
Received: from Unknown (HELO jmmacpro.tmst.com.au) (203.14.245.130)
 (smtp-auth username janm, mechanism plain)
 by mail3.transactionware.com (qpsmtpd/0.84) with (ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA
 encrypted) ESMTPSA; Mon, 14 Sep 2015 15:27:22 +1000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.2 \(2104\))
Subject: Re: L2ARC and pool corruption
From: Jan Mikkelsen <janm@transactionware.com>
In-Reply-To: <39E7A9FD-38BA-48E4-9718-C32AB4712C31@transactionware.com>
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 2015 15:27:21 +1000
Cc: "freebsd-fs@freebsd.org" <freebsd-fs@freebsd.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <2A71C2D2-78DC-4211-B99A-72B41EDEAEC3@transactionware.com>
References: <CA+o5Y=1L9_qdrPZs5G=z7ZH01MLpCMEGEPAQ6G8nTPcd1uzUNA@mail.gmail.com>
 <76AD038E-4D72-48BB-8A3B-BD9BD76F9350@longcount.org>
 <A2E9DD95-745C-4447-990C-189A184C1542@longcount.org>
 <CAGtEZUB2M9Aqkfg6Hs6MDOQ4F_VbqYHXZO9wYp76FQEPouWr4g@mail.gmail.com>
 <09E1F540-C9E6-4193-851E-5F935D97763F@transactionware.com>
 <CAGtEZUB6H6Y6wgkD3RP+vCs7c8MFw_8oKmUPnbaGR+oVBkMf6Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <39E7A9FD-38BA-48E4-9718-C32AB4712C31@transactionware.com>
To: Tom Curry <thomasrcurry@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.2104)
X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20
Precedence: list
List-Id: Filesystems <freebsd-fs.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-fs>,
 <mailto:freebsd-fs-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-fs/>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-fs@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-fs-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-fs>,
 <mailto:freebsd-fs-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 14 Sep 2015 05:27:28 -0000


> On 14 Sep 2015, at 10:59, Jan Mikkelsen <janm@transactionware.com> =
wrote:
>=20
>=20
>> On 14 Sep 2015, at 10:49, Tom Curry <thomasrcurry@gmail.com> wrote:
>>=20
>>=20
>>=20
>> On Sun, Sep 13, 2015 at 7:03 PM, Jan Mikkelsen =
<janm@transactionware.com <mailto:janm@transactionware.com>> wrote:
>>=20
>>> On 13 Sep 2015, at 01:21, Tom Curry <thomasrcurry@gmail.com =
<mailto:thomasrcurry@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>=20
>>> On Sat, Sep 12, 2015 at 7:19 AM, Mark Saad <nonesuch@longcount.org =
<mailto:nonesuch@longcount.org>> wrote:
>>>=20
>>>> All
>>>> I forgot to include my question . In any case Ryan and I were =
talking
>>>> about this issue at work and I was wondering if and how this issue =
would
>>>> effect the FreeBSD implementation of zfs . I didn't see any commits =
that
>>>> appear to address this .
>>>>=20
>>>> ---
>>>> Mark Saad | nonesuch@longcount.org <mailto:nonesuch@longcount.org>
>>>>=20
>>>>=20
>>> =
https://github.com/freebsd/freebsd/commit/0ab19d08a4167c4e486420d8ea4ec596=
8cbc4f42 =
<https://github.com/freebsd/freebsd/commit/0ab19d08a4167c4e486420d8ea4ec59=
68cbc4f42>
>>>=20
>>> Looks like it was merged into head 5 hours ago.
>>=20
>> Does this update need to be applied to stable/10 or 10.2 systems as =
well?
>>=20
>> Thanks
>>=20
>> Jan Mikkelsen.
>>=20
>>=20
>> When I looked yesterday it had only been applied to head. It seems =
like a simple enough patch for other trees.
>=20
>=20
> OK, so it=E2=80=99s a necessary patch for other trees? I=E2=80=99ll =
apply it on our local copy, but for data corruption issues like this it =
seems like an MFC or a patch to a release branch would be good.


Replying to myself after a bit more investigation =E2=80=94 this patch =
fixes a problem introduced in r287699, which is only in head. As far as =
I can see no action is required for stable/10.