Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 10:51:44 -0800 From: Devin Teske <devin.teske@fisglobal.com> To: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, Devin Teske <dteske@freebsd.org>, =?iso-8859-1?Q?Ali_Okan_Y=DCKSEL?= <kaox.gen@gmail.com> Subject: Re: disadvantages of running 8.3 kernel on freebsd 8.2 system Message-ID: <796BC3D0-522A-4E1E-8BC6-96741D96E0A4@fisglobal.com> In-Reply-To: <201301171103.41013.jhb@freebsd.org> References: <CANiJOX3Q7e1q7=4yvF6Hy%2BLRGZMqpyVrim7nxefeQViO86CvgQ@mail.gmail.com> <9A20C472-593A-4AAB-A0C0-FE6375011DAD@fisglobal.com> <201301171103.41013.jhb@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Jan 17, 2013, at 8:03 AM, John Baldwin wrote: > On Thursday, January 17, 2013 10:57:01 am Devin Teske wrote: >> On Jan 17, 2013, at 4:06 AM, Ali Okan Y=DCKSEL wrote: >>=20 >>> I know for UPDATING, it s not correct way, but i tried and 8.2 system=20 > works >>> with 8.3 kernel (copied 8.3 /boot/kernel directory to freebsd 8.2 >>> /boot/kernel) and it s not good solution but i want to know; >>>=20 >>>=20 >>> - What are specific disadvantages that i can see clearly, running 8.3 >>> kernel on freebsd 8.2? >>=20 >> A couple user land tools might barf on you (listed below). >>=20 >> Other than that, it's generally considered very safe. >>=20 >> The quintessential test-case is running an 8.2 jail under an 8.3 host. >>=20 >> We do this all the time with various releases (again, most-problematic=20 > utilities listed below). >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >>> - What are user land tools those not match with 8.3 kernel on freebsd >>> 8.2 system=85? >>>=20 >>=20 >> top and ps might complain about procsize mismatch. >>=20 >> netstat has been known to have problems if the gap is too wide. >=20 > These generally do not have problems in recent release branches. top and= ps=20 > haven't complained about procsize since the 4.x days as 5.0 introduced a = new=20 > kinfo_proc structure that the kernel exports and it hasn't changed in siz= e=20 > since 5.0. >=20 > The mfiutil issue dhw@ mentioned is real and is due to an mfi(4) driver=20 > change. I merged a fix for the panics to 8-stable, but it just makes > old mfiutil binaries not work at all. >=20 You're the perfect person to help us figure out why when we: 1. back-port mfi(4) from stable/8 into releng/8.3 (8.3-RELEASE-p5 at the ti= me of back-port) 2. Succeed in getting 8.3 to boot on Thunderbolt card 3. mfiutil produces Inappropriate ioctl for device Even after=85 4. Recompiling mfiutil from stable/8 (albeit in a releng/8.3 build environm= ent -- back ported headers applied for new macros even) Any hints on where to go next to restore mfiutil access? --=20 Devin _____________ The information contained in this message is proprietary and/or confidentia= l. If you are not the intended recipient, please: (i) delete the message an= d all copies; (ii) do not disclose, distribute or use the message in any ma= nner; and (iii) notify the sender immediately. In addition, please be aware= that any message addressed to our domain is subject to archiving and revie= w by persons other than the intended recipient. Thank you.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?796BC3D0-522A-4E1E-8BC6-96741D96E0A4>