From nobody Mon Dec 4 17:51:39 2023 X-Original-To: stable@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 4SkWSq2MFpz53c2W for ; Mon, 4 Dec 2023 17:51:55 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from delphij@gmail.com) Received: from mail-ed1-x52a.google.com (mail-ed1-x52a.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::52a]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256 client-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "GTS CA 1D4" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4SkWSp6l2wz3M5x for ; Mon, 4 Dec 2023 17:51:54 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from delphij@gmail.com) Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; none Received: by mail-ed1-x52a.google.com with SMTP id 4fb4d7f45d1cf-54c9116d05fso2521361a12.3 for ; Mon, 04 Dec 2023 09:51:54 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1701712311; x=1702317111; darn=freebsd.org; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=sqk2zAW6+DTRgT335pPY3d1vHuVAU3TCHlfYOz57n6o=; b=gBgOxlMUqxdCGn+sRhbyjgf1dAsrlDQygkZdPfVMKgDsx6dQysj9O+uqxmolyvGixX 1pvap2iRg9RNImStnOh5acwxNoQJ4A/sql+8dVopVQ0+ZpKXfAZIvperd42jVnOhY9qV sLZC58347lsjuTHlSOJtde4k8JcYHFBfmAA98LqrOKeOA6iE4eX24u86VKviZO+IpkiK GSLW911Kbr0MXmbGYoGnQgxAOAY88ksZYhnhp2/We4BW4/qQomrgV/bDqTFc6UHPbzR+ T736B1z7e4dBi2KiijrLSoadjMooynkA1fUecnP+EmE8IGZwQpCMdRmgEzV6QRJhw3TX /3hg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1701712311; x=1702317111; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=sqk2zAW6+DTRgT335pPY3d1vHuVAU3TCHlfYOz57n6o=; b=adu15QHC5cvoKnoXyYQbA3rx2tLhK6NuWyrz39A0cC4iKXvVC+aOn0QO5Sn7j/Em3O 1RyhLIbpjGbGHAj89Ti1/0whPkNDp0ehoYLjxK888vL2iilPqLJqMCTq6QAG5oQpyYtd UdvUqW2vjfPw2kMJL3XXapXBzByS0XVKUF+zoixAG1A/RYzpjKCIH68v002+8eRJqRKV 4XV9PMjHMUwNZvu5dzBgT3Kwvd2kQBq6vKXsir68cYzJURkWWHQinA2CKVUcW+CtLEQD /sYxJYa6jZYqBL6ow51WgvJ4KV+++O2GcvhSdk3RrUKq0hBM/RSkQELE2WMTyovRmdtW CfKA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YwYIriKYFYngvoDf2Oarzfyfq1G5ZayACQu/N1mtCMkydpuidKe d+JzvsWeg6/ET1rH4VXqnunOyCmZP2P8pkURYu1XoP4KC/s= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IFIMCwBdDKyWi3+kwgwVsYQ8juOBvFUFpJ5EsHKbkig74OVbxBJsbvaQKNf9tnIfm3DTBSRWP3IMWnGNBDlu6c= X-Received: by 2002:a50:9fa1:0:b0:54c:5492:da1a with SMTP id c30-20020a509fa1000000b0054c5492da1amr1859609edf.50.1701712311137; Mon, 04 Dec 2023 09:51:51 -0800 (PST) List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Archive: https://lists.freebsd.org/archives/freebsd-stable List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20231201031737.DF0231B942@freefall.freebsd.org> <445y1eaxiz.fsf@be-well.ilk.org> <20231204230246.f11fce2914500a99e094de0b@dec.sakura.ne.jp> In-Reply-To: <20231204230246.f11fce2914500a99e094de0b@dec.sakura.ne.jp> From: Xin LI Date: Mon, 4 Dec 2023 09:51:39 -0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: FreeBSD Errata Notice FreeBSD-EN-23:16.openzfs To: Tomoaki AOKI Cc: stable@freebsd.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000d0b9b4060bb2c5c8" X-Spamd-Bar: ---- X-Rspamd-Pre-Result: action=no action; module=replies; Message is reply to one we originated X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-4.00 / 15.00]; REPLY(-4.00)[]; ASN(0.00)[asn:15169, ipnet:2a00:1450::/32, country:US] X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4SkWSp6l2wz3M5x --000000000000d0b9b4060bb2c5c8 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, Dec 4, 2023 at 8:32=E2=80=AFAM Tomoaki AOKI wrote: > On Mon, 04 Dec 2023 08:48:52 -0500 > Lowell Gilbert wrote: > > > Kurt Jaeger writes: > > > > > I had thought that the ZFS fix is a kernel fix so that the kernel > > > would also report -p1, but it does not. It might be because > > > zfs is a kernel module, so the kernel itself was not really patched, > > > but I might be wrong here. > > > > As far as I can see, that seems exactly right. > > As this kind of confusion caused by mismatch of patchlevel between > kernel and userland arises from time to time, now would be the time to > switch to keep patchlevel in sync between kernel and userland. > > This would force both kernel and userland to be built using the same > patchlevel, even if one of which is actually unchanged. > But maybe helpful to avoid confusion like this. > > What was worse this time was that a non-in-kernel-but-in-tree module, > zfs.ko, is updated but kernel itself is not updated. Part of this is because freebsd-update generally wants to exclude cosmetic changes (like build timestamps, etc., which does not have an effect on runtime behavior) in binary patches, so in order to "fix" this we would need to change the update builder, at the expense of always delivering a kernel change regardless if there are any real changes to the binary. At the time when I owned the builder code, the consensus was that we are moving to a packaged base really soon (tm) and the builder is in "maintenance mode" so we didn't invest a lot in this front. Cheers, --000000000000d0b9b4060bb2c5c8 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


On Mon, Dec 4, 2023 at 8:32=E2=80= =AFAM Tomoaki AOKI <junchoo= n@dec.sakura.ne.jp> wrote:
On Mon, 04 Dec 2023 08:48:52 -0500
Lowell Gilbert <freebsd-stable-local@be-well.ilk.org> wrote:

> Kurt Jaeger <pi= @freebsd.org> writes:
>
> > I had thought that the ZFS fix is a kernel fix so that the kernel=
> > would also report -p1, but it does not. It might be because
> > zfs is a kernel module, so the kernel itself was not really patch= ed,
> > but I might be wrong here.
>
> As far as I can see, that seems exactly right.

As this kind of confusion caused by mismatch of patchlevel between
kernel and userland arises from time to time, now would be the time to
switch to keep patchlevel in sync between kernel and userland.

This would force both kernel and userland to be built using the same
patchlevel, even if one of which is actually unchanged.
But maybe helpful to avoid confusion like this.

What was worse this time was that a non-in-kernel-but-in-tree module,
zfs.ko, is updated but kernel itself is not updated.

<= /div>
Part of this is because freebsd-update generally wants to exclude cosmetic= changes (like build timestamps, etc., which does not have an effect on run= time behavior) in binary patches, so in order to "fix" this we wo= uld need to change the update builder, at the expense of always delivering = a kernel change regardless if there are any real changes to the binary.=C2= =A0 At the time when I owned the builder code, the consensus=C2=A0was that = we are moving to a packaged base really soon (tm) and the builder is in &qu= ot;maintenance mode" so we didn't invest a lot in this front.
Cheers,
--000000000000d0b9b4060bb2c5c8--