On Mon, Oct 22, 2018 at 05:21:43PM +0300, Andriy Gapon wrote: > On 22/10/2018 17:15, Glen Barber wrote: > > On Mon, Oct 22, 2018 at 09:09:14PM +0700, Eugene Grosbein wrote: > >> 22.10.2018 21:03, Glen Barber wrote: > >> > >> t's strange that this is a 10.x vs 11.x issue. > >>>>> I see that zfs has the krpc dependency since r193128. > >>>>> And the call to xdrmem_create is there since r168404. > >>>> > >>>> You are right. I was mis-informed and have not verified enough a report > >>>> from local user. > >>>> > >>>> Glen, maybe that errata record should be deleted. The problem is real > >>>> but it is long-standing > >>>> and present in 10.x too. > >>>> > >>> > >>> Could you elaborate more on the failure case you originally reported > >>> first? If the problem is real, my feeling is that the errata entry > >>> should stay, just worded differently to reflect the failure case here. > >> > >> zfs.ko depends on krpc.ko. The KRPC code in compiled in GENERIC kernel as > >> dependency > >> of NFS client/server code. The problem arises if all of these are true: > >> > >> 1) a system uses custom kernel with NFS options removed; > >> 2) there is no krpc.ko available due to MODULES_OVERRIDE excluding it; > >> 3) the system boots off ZFS pool. > >> > >> In such case, loader cannot resolve dependency and fails to load zfs.ko > >> and kernel fails to mount root breaking boot sequence. > >> > >> > > > > So, if I understand correctly (and please correct me if I am wrong), the > > majority of the text in the errata note is correct, however needs to be > > tweaked to remove "upgrading from 10.x...". Is this generally correct? > > This is just a typical foot-shooting (and a shortcoming of the kernel build > system that allows such foot-shooting to happen). > I think that there can be other ways in which you can specify inconsistent > kernel options and/or an incorrect subset of modules in MODULES_OVERRIDE to > create missing dependencies for critical modules. > Do we want to issue an errata for each possible misconfiguration? >
Not necessarily. I think it is a matter of how common the edge case is, for example. I am perfectly fine removing the errata entry if this is an extreme edge case. Meaning, I think it would be excessive to document the fallout from adding 'nodevice mem' to the configuration file. Glen
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
