Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 24 Apr 2023 22:30:26 -0600
From:      Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com>
To:        Charlie Li <vishwin@freebsd.org>
Cc:        Pete Wright <pete@nomadlogic.org>, FreeBSD Current <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: current status of zfs block_cloning on CURRENT?
Message-ID:  <CANCZdfozip=mGFQCK8ks3_A0p0OuQSpx1-r-Dtx6Wpix-huUjQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <9c55271b-e2cf-85b7-cc99-00ddcb76f98e@freebsd.org>
References:  <4f9470a0-4f14-a31b-52a9-7746d6fa09e6@nomadlogic.org> <5ee4d2ec-a09f-00ee-17f2-c1593aaf365c@freebsd.org> <9c55271b-e2cf-85b7-cc99-00ddcb76f98e@freebsd.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

[-- Attachment #1 --]
On Mon, Apr 24, 2023 at 9:49 PM Charlie Li <vishwin@freebsd.org> wrote:

> Charlie Li wrote:
> > Pete Wright wrote:
> >> i've seen a few threads about the block_cloning feature causing data
> >> corruption issues on CURRENT and have been keen to avoid enabling it
> >> until the dust settles.  i was under the impression that we either
> >> reverted or disabled block_cloning on CURRENT, but when i ran "zpool
> >> upgrade" on a pool today it reported block_cloning was enabled.  this
> >> is on a system i rebuilt yesterday.
> >>
> > The dust has settled.
> Barely...
> >> i was hoping to get some clarity on the effect of having this feature
> >> enabled, is this enough to trigger the data corruption bug or does
> >> something on the zfs filesystem itself have to be enabled to trigger
> >> this?
> >>
> > The initial problem with block_cloning [0][1] was fixed in commits
> > e0bb199925565a3770733afd1a4d8bb2d4d0ce31 and
> > 1959e122d9328b31a62ff7508e1746df2857b592, with a sysctl added in commit
> > 068913e4ba3dd9b3067056e832cefc5ed264b5cc. A different data corruption
> > problem [2][3] was fixed in commit
> > 63ee747febbf024be0aace61161241b53245449e. All were committed between
> > 15-17 April.
> >
> > [0] https://github.com/openzfs/zfs/pull/13392#issuecomment-1504239103
> > [1] https://github.com/openzfs/zfs/pull/14739
> > [2] https://github.com/openzfs/zfs/issues/14753
> > [3] https://github.com/openzfs/zfs/pull/14761
> >
> Given mjg@'s thread reporting further crashes/panics, you may want to
> keep the sysctl disabled if you upgraded the pool already.
>

I thought the plan was to keep it disabled until after 14. And even then,
when it comes back in, it will be a new feature It should never be enabled.

Warner

[-- Attachment #2 --]
<div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><br></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Mon, Apr 24, 2023 at 9:49 PM Charlie Li &lt;<a href="mailto:vishwin@freebsd.org">vishwin@freebsd.org</a>&gt; wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">Charlie Li wrote:<br>
&gt; Pete Wright wrote:<br>
&gt;&gt; i&#39;ve seen a few threads about the block_cloning feature causing data <br>
&gt;&gt; corruption issues on CURRENT and have been keen to avoid enabling it <br>
&gt;&gt; until the dust settles.  i was under the impression that we either <br>
&gt;&gt; reverted or disabled block_cloning on CURRENT, but when i ran &quot;zpool <br>
&gt;&gt; upgrade&quot; on a pool today it reported block_cloning was enabled.  this <br>
&gt;&gt; is on a system i rebuilt yesterday.<br>
&gt;&gt;<br>
&gt; The dust has settled.<br>
Barely...<br>
&gt;&gt; i was hoping to get some clarity on the effect of having this feature <br>
&gt;&gt; enabled, is this enough to trigger the data corruption bug or does <br>
&gt;&gt; something on the zfs filesystem itself have to be enabled to trigger <br>
&gt;&gt; this?<br>
&gt;&gt;<br>
&gt; The initial problem with block_cloning [0][1] was fixed in commits <br>
&gt; e0bb199925565a3770733afd1a4d8bb2d4d0ce31 and <br>
&gt; 1959e122d9328b31a62ff7508e1746df2857b592, with a sysctl added in commit <br>
&gt; 068913e4ba3dd9b3067056e832cefc5ed264b5cc. A different data corruption <br>
&gt; problem [2][3] was fixed in commit <br>
&gt; 63ee747febbf024be0aace61161241b53245449e. All were committed between <br>
&gt; 15-17 April.<br>
&gt; <br>
&gt; [0] <a href="https://github.com/openzfs/zfs/pull/13392#issuecomment-1504239103" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://github.com/openzfs/zfs/pull/13392#issuecomment-1504239103</a><br>;
&gt; [1] <a href="https://github.com/openzfs/zfs/pull/14739" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://github.com/openzfs/zfs/pull/14739</a><br>;
&gt; [2] <a href="https://github.com/openzfs/zfs/issues/14753" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://github.com/openzfs/zfs/issues/14753</a><br>;
&gt; [3] <a href="https://github.com/openzfs/zfs/pull/14761" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://github.com/openzfs/zfs/pull/14761</a><br>;
&gt; <br>
Given mjg@&#39;s thread reporting further crashes/panics, you may want to <br>
keep the sysctl disabled if you upgraded the pool already.<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>I thought the plan was to keep it disabled until after 14. And even then,</div><div>when it comes back in, it will be a new feature It should never be enabled.</div><div><br></div><div>Warner <br></div></div></div>

Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CANCZdfozip=mGFQCK8ks3_A0p0OuQSpx1-r-Dtx6Wpix-huUjQ>