[developer] [openzfs/openzfs] Merge remote-tracking branch 'illumos/master' into illumos-sync (#545)

You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at: https://github.com/openzfs/openzfs/pull/545 -- Commit Summary -- * 8792 mac_tx_srs_quiesce() can kill a maxbw link * 8652 Tautological comparisons with ZPROP_INVAL (followup) * 8760 troff: variable 'type' set but not used

[developer] Re: [openzfs/openzfs] 8115 parallel zfs mount (v2) (#536)

@prakashsurya pushed 1 commit. 181dfd2 Use LOCK_ERRORCHECK plus mutex_enter/mutex_exit -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. View it on GitHub:

[developer] Re: [openzfs/openzfs] 8115 parallel zfs mount (v2) (#536)

prakashsurya commented on this pull request. > + */ +static void +zfs_dispatch_mount(libzfs_handle_t *hdl, zfs_handle_t **handles, +size_t num_handles, int idx, zfs_iter_f func, void *data, taskq_t *tq) +{ + mnt_param_t *mnt_param = zfs_alloc(hdl, sizeof (mnt_param_t)); + +

[developer] Re: [openzfs/openzfs] 8115 parallel zfs mount (v2) (#536)

prakashsurya commented on this pull request. > @@ -88,6 +89,9 @@ #include #defineMAXISALEN 257 /* based on sysinfo(2) man page */ +static int mount_tq_nthr = 512;/* taskq threads for multi-threaded mounting */ @sebroy can you comment here? I don't see anything

[developer] Re: [openzfs/openzfs] 9074 domount() interprets ZFS filesystem names as relative paths (#538)

Thanks for the detailed write up and separating this out. In general, this looks good and I think we have the right file systems marked as required. @jjelinek does the mount in progress table get used for some of the zone/NFS related checks? I remember there being something that we talked about

[developer] Re: [openzfs/openzfs] 9091 Add mdb smart write (#544)

rmustacc commented on this pull request. > @@ -198,6 +198,100 @@ write_uint64(mdb_tgt_as_t as, mdb_tgt_addr_t addr, > uint64_t n, uint_t rdback) return (addr + sizeof (n)); } +/* + * Writes to objects of size 1, 2, 4, or 8 bytes. The function + * doesn't care if the object is a

[developer] Re: [openzfs/openzfs] 9091 Add mdb smart write (#544)

sdimitro commented on this pull request. > @@ -198,6 +198,100 @@ write_uint64(mdb_tgt_as_t as, mdb_tgt_addr_t addr, > uint64_t n, uint_t rdback) return (addr + sizeof (n)); } +/* + * Writes to objects of size 1, 2, 4, or 8 bytes. The function + * doesn't care if the object is a

[developer] Re: [openzfs/openzfs] 9075 Improve ZFS pool import/load process and corrupted pool recovery (#539)

andy-js commented on this pull request. Overall looks good. > +# +# We want to test the case where a whole created by a log device is filled +# by a regular device +# +function test_remove_log_then_add_vdev +{ + log_note "$0." + log_must zpool create -o cachefile=$CPATH $TESTPOOL1 \

[developer] Re: [openzfs/openzfs] 9091 Add mdb smart write (#544)

rmustacc commented on this pull request. In general, this looks good. Thanks. > @@ -198,6 +198,100 @@ write_uint64(mdb_tgt_as_t as, mdb_tgt_addr_t addr, > uint64_t n, uint_t rdback) return (addr + sizeof (n)); } +/* + * Writes to objects of size 1, 2, 4, or 8 bytes. The function + *

[developer] [openzfs/openzfs] Add mdb smart write (#544)

Reviewed by: Matthew Ahrens Reviewed by: Paul Dagnelie Reviewed by: Prashanth Sreenivasa Currently, if you want to write to a kernel tunable using mdb, you need to use the /Z or /W flags to write 8 or 4 bytes respectively. If you use the

[developer] Re: [openzfs/openzfs] 8115 parallel zfs mount (v2) (#536)

prakashsurya commented on this pull request. > @@ -416,6 +416,7 @@ enum { #defineVSW_XID 0x40/* file system supports extended ids */ #defineVSW_CANLOFI 0x80/* file system supports lofi mounts */ #defineVSW_ZMOUNT 0x100 /* file system always

[developer] Re: [openzfs/openzfs] 8115 parallel zfs mount (v2) (#536)

@rmustacc Thanks for the reply. Let me know after you give this version a look. If you think `libzfs` being a consumer of `libfakekernel`'s taskq implementation, then let's discuss the best way to break that out so we can do this properly. -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed

[developer] Re: [openzfs/openzfs] 8115 parallel zfs mount (v2) (#536)

rmustacc commented on this pull request. > @@ -416,6 +416,7 @@ enum { #defineVSW_XID 0x40/* file system supports extended ids */ #defineVSW_CANLOFI 0x80/* file system supports lofi mounts */ #defineVSW_ZMOUNT 0x100 /* file system always

[developer] Re: [openzfs/openzfs] 8115 parallel zfs mount (v2) (#536)

@prakashsurya Thanks for splitting out the change regarding the file system part, that makes things clearer. Honestly though, no, I still feel like this is the wrong approach in terms of leveraging the fake kernel library. But the fake kernel and libzpool are similar to me in so far as their

[developer] Re: [openzfs/openzfs] 8857 zio_remove_child() panic due to already destroyed parent zio (#505)

avg-I commented on this pull request. > @@ -3534,11 +3545,11 @@ zio_done(zio_t *zio) * If our children haven't all completed, * wait for them and then repeat this pipeline stage. */ - if (zio_wait_for_children(zio, ZIO_CHILD_VDEV, ZIO_WAIT_DONE) || -

[developer] Re: [openzfs/openzfs] 8857 zio_remove_child() panic due to already destroyed parent zio (#505)

avg-I approved this pull request. LGTM -- 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/505#pullrequestreview-95624832 -- openzfs-developer

[developer] Re: [openzfs/openzfs] 8857 zio_remove_child() panic due to already destroyed parent zio (#505)

@grwilson pushed 1 commit. 445e551 predefine child bits -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. View it on GitHub: https://github.com/openzfs/openzfs/pull/505/files/b1342b226af1aa8a39cbcbe3b59a9270765c8ef2..445e55128ca0a1cf9b0a7013d996edd50da3a0f4