From owner-freebsd-current@freebsd.org Tue Jul 12 14:17:41 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@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 36D5EB92905 for ; Tue, 12 Jul 2016 14:17:41 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gjb@FreeBSD.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206c::16:87]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 13FC51B01; Tue, 12 Jul 2016 14:17:41 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gjb@FreeBSD.org) Received: from FreeBSD.org (freefall.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206c::16:87]) by freefall.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BFE9812A7; Tue, 12 Jul 2016 14:17:40 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gjb@FreeBSD.org) Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2016 14:17:39 +0000 From: Glen Barber To: Matthew Seaman Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org, FreeBSD Release Engineering Team Subject: Re: Oversight in /etc/defaults/rc.conf Message-ID: <20160712141739.GC1520@FreeBSD.org> References: <20160712122732.GA5596@FreeBSD.org> <483d186c-ca63-60ef-5703-8a7ae37e9ced@freebsd.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="gr/z0/N6AeWAPJVB" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <483d186c-ca63-60ef-5703-8a7ae37e9ced@freebsd.org> X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 11.0-CURRENT amd64 X-SCUD-Definition: Sudden Completely Unexpected Dataloss X-SULE-Definition: Sudden Unexpected Learning Event X-PEKBAC-Definition: Problem Exists, Keyboard Between Admin/Computer User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 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: Tue, 12 Jul 2016 14:17:41 -0000 --gr/z0/N6AeWAPJVB Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 03:10:43PM +0100, Matthew Seaman wrote: > On 07/12/16 13:27, Glen Barber wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 07:17:19AM +0100, Matthew Seaman wrote: > >> I just upgraded my main machine to 11-STABLE. Things are mostly worki= ng > >> fine -- however I did notice that the new iovctl rc script is apparent= ly > >> enabled by default. That seems like a trivial omission: > >> > >> Index: etc/defaults/rc.conf > >> =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D > >> --- etc/defaults/rc.conf (revision 302482) > >> +++ etc/defaults/rc.conf (working copy) > >> @@ -695,6 +695,7 @@ > >> rctl_enable=3D"YES" # Load rctl(8) rules on boot > >> rctl_rules=3D"/etc/rctl.conf" # rctl(8) ruleset. See rctl.conf(5). > >> > >> +iovctl_enable=3D"NO" > >> iovctl_files=3D"" # Config files for iovctl(8) > >> > >> ############################################################## > >> > >=20 > > I'm not sure I understand. Is there a functional and/or performance > > impact with it enabled by default? (Note, I don't disable it in my > > rc.conf, and there is no /dev/iov/* on my system.) >=20 > I'm not religious about it being turned off per se. More that it should > have a clearly defined on/off state shown in the defaults. >=20 Ah, this was my confusion. Thank you for clarifying. > I went for 'off' following the general principle that rc.conf items > should mostly be off by default and require specific action to enable. > Yes, there are exceptions to this rule, but I see no particular reason > that iovctl should be one. What's the advantage to turning it on by > default on every FreeBSD installation? >=20 > However, even if it's felt it should be enabled everywhere, then > shouldn't /etc/defaults/rc.conf have: >=20 > iovctl_enable=3D"YES" >=20 > instead? >=20 I'm not pro -vs- con either way. But I think this should be resolved in head first, and MFC'd to stable/11, as this isn't something I think should be in the "checklist" when branching. I think you are really pointing out a different "bug" here. Glen --gr/z0/N6AeWAPJVB Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJXhPwDAAoJEAMUWKVHj+KTrAIQAIaYmK+GGB7b1rjYycsGY503 Yl6tiz7L+qTCqhnfL9uVrrIXHJN1t4FstqbnpyaS4Izyd6UCf15cTKdLH+sz86Nx q7SYoY07mcsZEk4/SRE3pvJ0gvLH/3M3qszUOaXOiRSVylv4VTYqDhdGTI3PnY9r hyigx/riZVPIljYzNkx44LFv9qgS3uQF+ZIDD4PcwlUxJGrEi5DInS78l9qIaI93 pdq0b/GkWS0Ql5CBsDaeZtOvnV/xeTXki0UVA8RV7giEZ6BIhRHJME5kkqTNflSN VI7N1aL/MHNP1hE383AZ0ob9jOAI7kSqPj4YHr6LZMi8xptKQz8APQPGo3TzaYG7 5+IEaKTUY/80HGyJvi2aVP4b3vK0xNzF3CxsHUZFqmVm4i+la8e0YpSb40eyjXUT IVZfwFHFd9jaE6eGa8YCMa/hpPZDi74Br6WceZG0U3pRktlY+a/EelpJPFcgXf5j 17U0m4IBk6qSbjhY8Fvp3g6PGHTC+9N2E2Y05p9WuZdBaXWE9P1TC4Wq9trdvYYk tj6/ojb8BZ1nIKkf4Qk5LgRPPD40ZM4dWLIy81kyMzxk9t/07eKCdo7uHLVamEaB nqPn7nNzfEy3VDCUZ5Zj0xwslKsG9tAUtUxRoJek58qvvIuDVl7IUyTUwhTsdZb5 5V7nO3pzkkKVs/iOju5I =5iwp -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --gr/z0/N6AeWAPJVB--