superseded by https://github.com/openzfs/openzfs/pull/536
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/openzfs/openzfs/pull/451#issuecomment-363602620
--
I plan to pick this up again next week. This needs to be rebased onto the
latest master code, and the libzpool/taskq changes that landed recently.
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
what is it status of this update?
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/openzfs/openzfs/pull/451#issuecomment-362007731
--
openzfs-developer
Archives:
I spent the weekend reworking libzpool to use libfakekernel. Here's a summary
of the changes:
- libzpool is now built in fake-kernel context and uses the taskq API in
libfakekernel. Most of the defines in zfs_context.h have been dropped in
favour of included system header files.
-
@andy-js Thank you. I was hoping to get some time to focus on this, but I'm not
sure I'll be able to in the short term. If you have time to open a PR that only
makes libzfs and libzpool consumers of libfakekernel, and remove the current
taskq implementation from libzpool, that'd be great. I
Sounds good to me. I'll look at updating libzpool to use libfakekernel.
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/openzfs/openzfs/pull/451#issuecomment-341067822
I like where this is going.
IMO, I think we should split the taskq changes out from this change (as
suggested), do what's needed to get libzfs (and maybe libzpool also) using
libfakekernel, and then apply what's left of this change on top of the taskq
changes.
This way, there's a clear
Well that depends on whether or not they're pulling in both libzfs and
libzpool. From what I can see most things (like the zfs and zpool commands)
only pull in libzfs, so they should be okay.
I have no problem with changing libzpool to use libfakekernel. I chose not to
go down that route
Andy, if you have this use libfakekernel, don't we end up with two taskq
implementations in consumers of libzfs? (the second being the one in libzpool).
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
I took at stab at updating the changeset to use libfakekernel instead:
http://cr.illumos.org/~webrev/andy_js/8115/
Apart from some weirdness with sys/cmn_err.h conflicting with stdio.h it was
straightforward.
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this
@prakashsurya Do you think it would make sense to split the changes to the VFS
code out into a separate issue?
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
You forgot to add a mapping for taskqid_t to sys/zfs_context.h.
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/openzfs/openzfs/pull/451#issuecomment-68160
--
Looks like the build failed because of a network issue.
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/openzfs/openzfs/pull/451#issuecomment-333242633
--
The automated testing wasn't picking up the prior PR for this change in #359,
so I've re-opened that PR here so it can undergo the usual testing.
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
14 matches
Mail list logo
