From nobody Fri Nov 29 19:38:36 2024 X-Original-To: freebsd-current@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 4Y0NlZ4Kvsz5fcQT for ; Fri, 29 Nov 2024 19:38:50 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wlosh@bsdimp.com) Received: from mail-pl1-x629.google.com (mail-pl1-x629.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::629]) (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 "WR4" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4Y0NlY4pFRz4sBV for ; Fri, 29 Nov 2024 19:38:49 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wlosh@bsdimp.com) Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=pass header.d=bsdimp-com.20230601.gappssmtp.com header.s=20230601 header.b=Z3k62+Wm; spf=none (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of wlosh@bsdimp.com has no SPF policy when checking 2607:f8b0:4864:20::629) smtp.mailfrom=wlosh@bsdimp.com; dmarc=none Received: by mail-pl1-x629.google.com with SMTP id d9443c01a7336-21207f0d949so20703365ad.2 for ; Fri, 29 Nov 2024 11:38:49 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=bsdimp-com.20230601.gappssmtp.com; s=20230601; t=1732909128; x=1733513928; 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=o/1P5yDXsulP5MSWHHrHqKjLo61Kpd/sFVyuY1AJUs8=; b=Z3k62+Wm6ELEPTyPU1QJECeSe6YmAr+6VaBuEfohWDl96Au0TSfYcFfcs8/Y7+sLPW RN4VWO4X1e8yH0ODEY6J5oEbNFWNpin9Cdll/ZtWYZ9pK4aKTFOcSn4+Cxg5sZhn6ZOV EBWPjtUPYYCcSD/FRk+4tpn8YGPYIBVXXwCYy0+T8f8Y5ScqdJEhDrzle5rS880Hh/Lj mt34ASRZZfU9/B1TCE+BvNgS7fdnIKJ0E04G291xcc4QGSiHviBDDe+mjpONV4wtHVKi trqHbeCSA3ql8DohaqILExOeUwSjmlexcxyDdrET0we7tnA86jroos8y6IpEh6St0v/E QfvQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1732909128; x=1733513928; 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=o/1P5yDXsulP5MSWHHrHqKjLo61Kpd/sFVyuY1AJUs8=; b=L92UEXLteb1ZzzqijuGjKGCgcw98zSqLeILCfKDExkAletRf2VvGBmBpAW4yfcb38h gP1oe0iS4+0MpOcHeNy4TtIG1+wiC6ECH2OMP0T7X/ZoUH7v0gVmoI0d0CwusZj5rAVd 7aZ21I2o3zojPbGR3ItEsfzXWsOPsMC64A9FsKrZT2Z1yH8w0GEr9Hz7D+gVfbBqJG/X x6YuebgghyOqDSkRlOeKbvMzXbGKz0j6h0AGzXapzM2JXj8Mxi6Oche7oy/8DDyjFzk8 Tk0jDdy6Tu48u2zIJ+PTslaj6ZC1l9IbycEjA8GuFJDqIR9S3jeNTphP1v4UYGndv7vv u7CA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YyZMSk63Ed5uJ5/Ep13JEQAghtd5IE7gzuNzjFyp8qhdc8ZKRwm Uhrs24jTNyyPIf4GeIWdbRdtyOyqSch7tmmuZVq+DSbDa+8EMNIIzmQFa8cg3gU12Fay1nhBBj+ pV8Cv/1TkGzOcPu/LvL7vXgzVuGla4MPRI3WSFQ== X-Gm-Gg: ASbGncsVd41V6S+AzlZzL3X8VVF+Dy22gXQ0z/rTl4KjeT7/9Vg59o+c1VJ92AaB32t SriWYFr8QdGckcaIH8KjzzZ6Vf2OIhMw= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IH99shIBuYnK0YgFwanE6pDvHCQzObR7/EYGy28+uNM36pV+09RYySdiOfWXcQghhjAQX769FaGNk3VuY7AeUo= X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:e810:b0:212:5d38:b45f with SMTP id d9443c01a7336-21501085456mr164379975ad.8.1732909128259; Fri, 29 Nov 2024 11:38:48 -0800 (PST) List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Archive: https://lists.freebsd.org/archives/freebsd-current List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Warner Losh Date: Fri, 29 Nov 2024 12:38:36 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Long time outdated jemalloc To: cglogic Cc: FreeBSD CURRENT , Minsoo Choo Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000004b6df06281259ae" X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-3.00 / 15.00]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-1.00)[-1.000]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000]; NEURAL_HAM_SHORT(-1.00)[-1.000]; FORGED_SENDER(0.30)[imp@bsdimp.com,wlosh@bsdimp.com]; R_DKIM_ALLOW(-0.20)[bsdimp-com.20230601.gappssmtp.com:s=20230601]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[multipart/alternative,text/plain]; ASN(0.00)[asn:15169, ipnet:2607:f8b0::/32, country:US]; RCVD_COUNT_ONE(0.00)[1]; R_SPF_NA(0.00)[no SPF record]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+,1:+,2:~]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; MISSING_XM_UA(0.00)[]; RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE(0.00)[2607:f8b0:4864:20::629:from]; DMARC_NA(0.00)[bsdimp.com]; FREEMAIL_TO(0.00)[protonmail.com]; RCVD_TLS_LAST(0.00)[]; FROM_NEQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[imp@bsdimp.com,wlosh@bsdimp.com]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[3]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_SOME(0.00)[]; TO_DN_ALL(0.00)[]; PREVIOUSLY_DELIVERED(0.00)[freebsd-current@freebsd.org]; MLMMJ_DEST(0.00)[freebsd-current@freebsd.org]; DKIM_TRACE(0.00)[bsdimp-com.20230601.gappssmtp.com:+] X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4Y0NlY4pFRz4sBV X-Spamd-Bar: -- --00000000000004b6df06281259ae Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I've been swamped. we need to bootstrap the vendor branch, and the way prior updates were done isn't so great. Warner On Mon, Nov 25, 2024 at 2:21=E2=80=AFAM cglogic wr= ote: > Hello guys, > > How the update of jemalloc is going? It's November now. > > Thanks. > On Monday, July 22nd, 2024 at 7:02 PM, Minsoo Choo < > minsoochoo0122@proton.me> wrote: > > First, sorry for late response. > > cglogic, thank you for bringing up this issue again since I nearly forgot > that this issue was still open. > > Warner, as I can't access to my FreeBSD instance until the end of August, > but I can still edit and push the code through my Arm Mac. This means tha= t > I can't test the updated code on my machine, but I can join the review > process and listen to change proposals. > > I'll open a Github PR in a few hours. (The phabricator review will stay > opened just in case) > On Monday, July 22nd, 2024 at 5:08 AM, Warner Losh wrote= : > > > > On Sun, Jul 21, 2024 at 2:03=E2=80=AFPM cglogic = wrote: > >> >> On Sunday, July 21st, 2024 at 6:54 AM, Warner Losh >> wrote: >> >> >> >> On Sat, Jul 20, 2024 at 1:59=E2=80=AFAM cglogic = wrote: >> >>> Hello FreeBSD community, >>> >>> After Jason Evans stepped aside from maintaining jemalloc in FreeBSD, >>> it's not updating in time anymore. >>> Version 5.3.0 was released May 6, 2022 and FreeBSD still not imported >>> it into the tree. >>> >>> There is a pending review https://reviews.freebsd.org/D41421 from Aug >>> 11, 2023. >>> I'm successfully running FreeBSD/amd64 system with D41421 applied for 8 >>> months, as well as many other people. >>> >>> Can it be reviewed and committed to CURRENT? >>> Or, if there is no committers willing to do it, can commit bit be given >>> to submitter or another person willing to do this? >>> >>> It's very disappointing when users spend their time to fill such gaps >>> and their efforts just ignored by the developers. >>> Every year FreeBSD Community Survey asking about user experience in >>> contributing to FreeBSD. >>> Here you can see an example of such contributing. >>> >>> >> First, thank you for being persistent and continuing to bring it up. It'= s >> important to do that to make sure this (and your many other) contributio= n >> doesn't fall on the floor. >> >> And to be fair, we're only 3 months since the last update. Still, quite = a >> bit longer than you should have to wait, but not nearly the year the >> original date suggests. >> >> And this is a perfect storm of "how the project is bad at accepting >> contributions": >> (1) The original submission was close to the 14 branch creation time. >> This meant that we weren't well prepared to look at it since it is such = an >> invasive change (at least on its surface). It also slowed the initial >> response... >> (2) There was a number of back and forth requests for changes, which too= k >> time to sort out... >> (3) The size of this is huge, well beyond the capacity of Phabricator to >> review accurately... >> (4) It's a vendor import. That means we can't just drop the Phabricator >> review into the tree... >> (5) It's phabricator: this is a great tool for developers, but we have a >> terrible track record of using it for intake from new contributors. We >> don't have any oversight at all over this tool, at there's at best tepid >> and luke warm attempts to look for drop balls. >> >> All of these things are a terrible experience. I can only apologize. >> These days, we might steer this towards github, but the 'vendor import' >> means you really need someone on the inside, or you need to be on the >> inside to make that work. >> >> So, how to move forward? Well, I'd like to propose the following: >> (1) submit all the other Phabricator reviews you have open (they are >> mostly good, or close to good) to github. Github is being actively manag= ed >> and will make it faster to get things it. It's a much better tool for ne= w >> contributors (and even frequent contributors of smallish things). >> (2) I should do an vendor import of 5.3.0 from github, and do the merge >> to a branch and push that to github. You can then layer on your changes = and >> those can be reviewed more closely as a pull request against the branch = I >> push. I suspect that most of the issues are sorted out already >> (3) I'll land it via that route... >> >> And, if the sum of the other pull requests and this are good (and I >> suspect they will be), then we can talk about commit bits and such. >> >> It's experiences like this which is why I'm trying to stand up github >> pull requests as a reliable way to get things and and the best place to >> send people... >> >> Thanks again for persisting, and also for expressing this criticism that >> we (hopefully) can use to make it better. >> >> Warner >> >> >> Hello. >> >> I'm not the author of D41421. Just applied the patch to test it 8 months >> ago. And recently discovered that it's still not committed. >> I can't copy your message to Phabricator because don't have an account. = Please, >> if you have time, help the author in D41421. >> > > Ah yes. I've been in touch with the author for other things, and somehow > thought it was you.... I'll reach out to him via other means... > > Warner > > > > --00000000000004b6df06281259ae Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I've been swamped. we need to bootstrap the vendor bra= nch, and the way prior updates were done
isn't so great.=C2=A0

Warner

On Mon, Nov 25, 2024= at 2:21=E2=80=AFAM cglogic <c= glogic@protonmail.com> wrote:
Hello guys,

= How the update of jemalloc is going? It's November now.

Thanks.
I'll open a Github P= R in a few hours. (The phabricator review will stay opened just in case)
On Monday, July 22nd, 2024 at 5:08 AM, Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> wrote:


On Sun, Jul 21, 2024 at 2= :03=E2=80=AFPM cglogic <cglogic@protonmail.com= > wrote:

On Sunday, July 21st, 2024 at 6:54 AM, Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> wrote:


On Sat, Jul 20, 2024 at 1= :59=E2=80=AFAM cglogic <cglogic@protonmail.com= > wrote:
Hello FreeBSD community,

After Jason Evans stepped aside from = maintaining jemalloc in FreeBSD, it's not updating in time anymore.
Version 5.3.0 was released = May 6, 2022 and FreeBSD still not imported it into the tree.

There is a pending review https://reviews.freebsd.org/D41421 from Aug 11, 2023.
I'm succes= sfully running FreeBSD/amd64 system with D41421 applied for 8 months, as we= ll as many other people.

= Can it be reviewed and committed to CURRENT?
Or, if there is no committe= rs willing to do it, can commit bit be given to submitter or another person= willing to do this?
=
It's very disappointing when users spend their time to fi= ll such gaps and their efforts just ignored by the developers.
Every year FreeBSD Community Survey asking about user experience in contr= ibuting to FreeBSD.
Here you can see an example of su= ch contributing.


Firs= t, thank you for being persistent and continuing to bring it up. It's i= mportant to do that to make sure this (and your many other) contribution do= esn't fall on the floor.

And to be fair, w= e're only 3 months since the last update. Still, quite a bit longer tha= n you should have to wait, but not nearly the year the original date sugges= ts.

And this is a perfect storm of "how t= he project is bad at accepting contributions":
(1) The origi= nal submission was close to the 14 branch creation time. This meant that we= weren't well prepared to look at it since it is such an invasive chang= e (at least on its surface). It also slowed the initial response...
(2) There was a number of back and forth requests for changes, which= took time to sort out...
(3) The size of this is huge, well beyo= nd the capacity of Phabricator to review accurately...
(4) It'= ;s a vendor import. That means we can't just drop the Phabricator revie= w into the tree...
(5) It's phabricator: this is a great tool= for developers, but we have a terrible track record of using it for intake= from new contributors. We don't have any oversight at all over this to= ol, at there's at best tepid and luke warm attempts to look for drop ba= lls.

All of these things are a terrible experience= . I can only apologize. These days, we might steer this towards github, but= the 'vendor import' means you really need someone on the inside, o= r you need to be on the inside to make that work.

= So, how to move forward? Well, I'd like to propose the following:
=
(1) submit all the other Phabricator reviews you have open (they are m= ostly good, or close to good) to github. Github is being actively managed a= nd will make it faster to get things it. It's a much better tool for ne= w contributors (and even frequent contributors of smallish things).
(2) I should do an vendor import of 5.3.0 from github, and do the merge = to a branch and push that to github. You can then layer on your changes and= those can be reviewed more closely as a pull request against the branch I = push. I suspect that most of the issues are sorted out already
(3) I'll land it via that route...

And, if = the sum of the other pull requests and this are good (and I suspect they wi= ll be), then we can talk about commit bits and such.

It's experiences like this which is why I'm trying to stand up g= ithub pull requests as a reliable way to get things and and the best place = to send people...

Thanks again for persistin= g, and also for expressing this criticism that we (hopefully) can use to ma= ke it better.

Warner

Hello.

I'm not the author of = D41421. Just applied the patch to test it 8 months ago. And recently = discovered that it's still not committed.
I can't copy your message to Phabricator becaus= e don't have an account. Please, if you have time, help the auth= or in D41421.

Ah yes. I've been i= n touch with the author for other things, and somehow thought it was you...= . I'll reach out to him via other means...

Wa= rner


--00000000000004b6df06281259ae--