From owner-freebsd-current@freebsd.org Wed Jun 17 02:19:53 2020 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0607B33F428 for ; Wed, 17 Jun 2020 02:19:53 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freqlabs@FreeBSD.org) Received: from smtp.freebsd.org (smtp.freebsd.org [96.47.72.83]) (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-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "smtp.freebsd.org", Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 49mpgD6Mxqz47PM for ; Wed, 17 Jun 2020 02:19:52 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freqlabs@FreeBSD.org) Received: from Ryans-MBP.attlocal.net (unknown [IPv6:2600:1700:358a:c660:b125:ee0f:a3ca:89e1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) (Authenticated sender: freqlabs/mail) by smtp.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id BFB201805D for ; Wed, 17 Jun 2020 02:19:52 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freqlabs@FreeBSD.org) Subject: Re: does a ZFS change in head require additional work? To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org References: From: Ryan Moeller Message-ID: Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2020 22:19:52 -0400 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.9.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Language: en-US X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.33 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 17 Jun 2020 02:19:53 -0000 On 6/16/20 9:39 PM, Rick Macklem wrote: > Hi, > > r362158 changed the arguments for zfs_checkexp() in head. > There were no other changes, since the arguments are simply > passed on to vfs_stdcheckexp(). > > Is there something else that needs to be done, > such as sending this patch upstream? > > rick Yes please do upstream this! The FreeBSD snapshot for head used by the CI bot was broken this week (in libc) so your change to the KPI has managed to fly under the radar. We'll need this merged upstream before I update the FreeBSD ports for OpenZFS. Thanks for the reminder! -Ryan > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list > https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"