re: ZFS works on 8.99.34 but fails on 201905260520Z

2019-05-29 Thread matthew green
> Do we really expect module updates without updating kernel
> to work?
>
> If yes will do iot next time.

yes - if you add, not just change, to the kernel abi in a way
that modules will notice, please bump the version.  it should
make this sort of problem more obvious (due to missing file
errors, vs "error 8".)

thanks!


.mrg.


Re: ZFS works on 8.99.34 but fails on 201905260520Z

2019-05-29 Thread Paul Goyette

On Wed, 29 May 2019, Petr Topiarz wrote:

Thank you for this investigation, now its clear, where the problem lays, I 
will reinstall when this is corrected.


Kernel version has just been bumped, so newer kernel with newer modules 
(version 8.99.42) should work just fine.



++--+---+
| Paul Goyette   | PGP Key fingerprint: | E-mail addresses: |
| (Retired)  | FA29 0E3B 35AF E8AE 6651 | p...@whooppee.com |
| Software Developer | 0786 F758 55DE 53BA 7731 | pgoye...@netbsd.org   |
++--+---+


Re: ZFS works on 8.99.34 but fails on 201905260520Z

2019-05-29 Thread Petr Topiarz
Thank you for this investigation, now its clear, where the problem lays, 
I will reinstall when this is corrected.


Peter

Dne 29. 05. 19 v 1:38 Paul Goyette napsal(a):
The commit that introduced the new symbol should also have bumped the 
kernel version...  That's how we keep modules and kernel in sync...



On Tue, 28 May 2019, m...@netbsd.org wrote:


Found the commit - looks like newer modules than kernel.
https://v4.freshbsd.org/commit/netbsd/src/IH8Jag0YCI3N6boB

!DSPAM:5cedc4b046711245568741!




++--+---+
| Paul Goyette   | PGP Key fingerprint: | E-mail addresses: |
| (Retired)  | FA29 0E3B 35AF E8AE 6651 | p...@whooppee.com |
| Software Developer | 0786 F758 55DE 53BA 7731 | pgoye...@netbsd.org   |
++--+---+




Re: ZFS works on 8.99.34 but fails on 201905260520Z

2019-05-29 Thread J. Hannken-Illjes
> On 29. May 2019, at 01:38, Paul Goyette  wrote:
> 
> The commit that introduced the new symbol should also have bumped the kernel 
> version...  That's how we keep modules and kernel in sync...
> 
> 
> On Tue, 28 May 2019, m...@netbsd.org wrote:
> 
>> Found the commit - looks like newer modules than kernel.
>> https://v4.freshbsd.org/commit/netbsd/src/IH8Jag0YCI3N6boB

Do we really expect module updates without updating kernel
to work?

If yes will do iot next time.

--
J. Hannken-Illjes - hann...@eis.cs.tu-bs.de - TU Braunschweig


signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP


Re: ZFS works on 8.99.34 but fails on 201905260520Z

2019-05-29 Thread Petr Topiarz

Thanks, I will do that, though I do now know how this happened.

Dne 28. 05. 19 v 23:40 J. Hannken-Illjes napsal(a):

Petr,

your kernel is elder than your ZFS module.

Please update to a current kernel and try again.

--
J. Hannken-Illjes - hann...@eis.cs.tu-bs.de - TU Braunschweig




On 28. May 2019, at 20:27, Petr Topiarz  wrote:

Hi Tech-kern,

I run two machines with NetBSD amd64 with ZFS, one is with 8.99.34 kernel from 
february,

the other is the latest today, 201905260520Z,

It all runs fine with the first one, but as I upgraded the other, ZFS does not 
load and tels me:

modload: zfs: Exec format error

and to /var/log messages it writes:

May 28 18:55:46 poweredge /netbsd: [ 236.3881944] kobj_checksyms, 988: [zfs]: 
linker error: symbol `disk_rename' not found
May 28 18:55:46 poweredge /netbsd: [ 236.4833169] WARNING: module error: unable 
to affix module `zfs', error 8
May 28 18:55:50 poweredge /netbsd: [ 240.2655954] kobj_checksyms, 988: [zfs]: 
linker error: symbol `disk_rename' not found
May 28 18:55:50 poweredge /netbsd: [ 240.3599823] WARNING: module error: unable 
to affix module `zfs', error 8
May 28 18:56:18 poweredge /netbsd: [ 268.0810981] kobj_checksyms, 988: [zfs]: 
linker error: symbol `disk_rename' not found
May 28 18:56:18 poweredge /netbsd: [ 268.1715047] WARNING: module error: unable 
to affix module `zfs', error 8

considering configuration I got:

cat /etc/modules.conf
solaris
zfs

and in /etc/rc.conf I got

modules=YES

Any hint where to look or what to reconfigure in the kernel? I am using 
standard netbsd kernel in both cases.

thanks

Petr





Re: ZFS works on 8.99.34 but fails on 201905260520Z

2019-05-28 Thread Paul Goyette
The commit that introduced the new symbol should also have bumped the 
kernel version...  That's how we keep modules and kernel in sync...



On Tue, 28 May 2019, m...@netbsd.org wrote:


Found the commit - looks like newer modules than kernel.
https://v4.freshbsd.org/commit/netbsd/src/IH8Jag0YCI3N6boB

!DSPAM:5cedc4b046711245568741!




++--+---+
| Paul Goyette   | PGP Key fingerprint: | E-mail addresses: |
| (Retired)  | FA29 0E3B 35AF E8AE 6651 | p...@whooppee.com |
| Software Developer | 0786 F758 55DE 53BA 7731 | pgoye...@netbsd.org   |
++--+---+


Re: ZFS works on 8.99.34 but fails on 201905260520Z

2019-05-28 Thread maya
Found the commit - looks like newer modules than kernel.
https://v4.freshbsd.org/commit/netbsd/src/IH8Jag0YCI3N6boB


Re: ZFS works on 8.99.34 but fails on 201905260520Z

2019-05-28 Thread Paul Goyette

On Tue, 28 May 2019, m...@netbsd.org wrote:


On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 08:27:20PM +0200, Petr Topiarz wrote:

May 28 18:55:46 poweredge /netbsd: [ 236.3881944] kobj_checksyms, 988:
[zfs]: linker error: symbol `disk_rename' not found


Usually this happens if kernel and modules are mismatched.
I'm not sure what happened to cause it, but building your kernel and
modules from scratch from the same source will fix it.

It's also possible something else is worng (but less likely).


More likely there's a module dependency that is not recorded in the zfs 
module.


See if you can figure out where disk_rename would normally be defined, 
and determine if it is included in your kernel, or in some other 
non-built-in module.



++--+---+
| Paul Goyette   | PGP Key fingerprint: | E-mail addresses: |
| (Retired)  | FA29 0E3B 35AF E8AE 6651 | p...@whooppee.com |
| Software Developer | 0786 F758 55DE 53BA 7731 | pgoye...@netbsd.org   |
++--+---+


Re: ZFS works on 8.99.34 but fails on 201905260520Z

2019-05-28 Thread J. Hannken-Illjes
Petr,

your kernel is elder than your ZFS module.

Please update to a current kernel and try again.

--
J. Hannken-Illjes - hann...@eis.cs.tu-bs.de - TU Braunschweig



> On 28. May 2019, at 20:27, Petr Topiarz  wrote:
> 
> Hi Tech-kern,
> 
> I run two machines with NetBSD amd64 with ZFS, one is with 8.99.34 kernel 
> from february,
> 
> the other is the latest today, 201905260520Z,
> 
> It all runs fine with the first one, but as I upgraded the other, ZFS does 
> not load and tels me:
> 
> modload: zfs: Exec format error
> 
> and to /var/log messages it writes:
> 
> May 28 18:55:46 poweredge /netbsd: [ 236.3881944] kobj_checksyms, 988: [zfs]: 
> linker error: symbol `disk_rename' not found
> May 28 18:55:46 poweredge /netbsd: [ 236.4833169] WARNING: module error: 
> unable to affix module `zfs', error 8
> May 28 18:55:50 poweredge /netbsd: [ 240.2655954] kobj_checksyms, 988: [zfs]: 
> linker error: symbol `disk_rename' not found
> May 28 18:55:50 poweredge /netbsd: [ 240.3599823] WARNING: module error: 
> unable to affix module `zfs', error 8
> May 28 18:56:18 poweredge /netbsd: [ 268.0810981] kobj_checksyms, 988: [zfs]: 
> linker error: symbol `disk_rename' not found
> May 28 18:56:18 poweredge /netbsd: [ 268.1715047] WARNING: module error: 
> unable to affix module `zfs', error 8
> 
> considering configuration I got:
> 
> cat /etc/modules.conf
> solaris
> zfs
> 
> and in /etc/rc.conf I got
> 
> modules=YES
> 
> Any hint where to look or what to reconfigure in the kernel? I am using 
> standard netbsd kernel in both cases.
> 
> thanks
> 
> Petr
> 



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP


Re: ZFS works on 8.99.34 but fails on 201905260520Z

2019-05-28 Thread maya
On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 08:27:20PM +0200, Petr Topiarz wrote:
> May 28 18:55:46 poweredge /netbsd: [ 236.3881944] kobj_checksyms, 988:
> [zfs]: linker error: symbol `disk_rename' not found

Usually this happens if kernel and modules are mismatched.
I'm not sure what happened to cause it, but building your kernel and
modules from scratch from the same source will fix it.

It's also possible something else is worng (but less likely).