Pawel Jakub Dawidek wrote:
> On Sun, May 04, 2008 at 10:10:31PM +0200, Pawel Jakub Dawidek wrote:
>> Hi.
>>
>> I'm working on getting the most recent ZFS to the FreeBSD's CVS. Because
>> of the huge amount of changes, I decided to work on ZFS regression
>> tests, so I'm more or less sure nothing br
Dino wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> I have just installed Solaris and have added a 3x500GB raidz drive array. I
> am able to use this pool ('tank') successfully locally, but when I try to
> share it remotely, I can only read, I cannot execute or write. I didn't do
> anything other than the default
Pawel Jakub Dawidek wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 04:28:45PM +0200, Pawel Jakub Dawidek wrote:
>> Hi.
>>
>> I just reproduced a problem I was chasing on FreeBSD also on
>> OpenSolaris from around 2008.01.
>>
>> Simply doing something like this:
>>
>> write 9k of random data into 'foo' file
Girish Shilamkar wrote:
> Hi,
> With reference to my previous mail ([zfs-code] Nvpair for storing EAs
> in dnode) which had expressed our intent to use libnvpair for EAs in
> dnode. I am now sending a high level design document for the same.
>
> Any suggestions/comments are most welcome.
>
Ricardo M. Correia wrote:
>
> On Qui, 2008-02-07 at 09:44 -0700, Mark Shellenbaum wrote:
>> I'm not sure we should be using nvlists to store these attributes.
>> While it will be quick to implement, I'm concerned about the constant
>> packing/unpacking and se
Matthew Ahrens wrote:
> Mark Shellenbaum wrote:
>> Girish Shilamkar wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>> With reference to my previous mail ([zfs-code] Nvpair for storing EAs
>>> in dnode) which had expressed our intent to use libnvpair for EAs in
>>> dnode. I am now
Darren J Moffat wrote:
> DMU_OT_ACL and DMU_OT_OLDACL are both marked as objects that should be
> encrypted when the dataset has encryption enabled - because they are
> used for ZPL layer ACLs and are thus sensitive information.
>
> I need to know what DMU_OT_SYSACL is used for so I can determin
Pawel Jakub Dawidek wrote:
> In zfs_mount() function, when we process a mount by a regular user
> through the delegated administration, the comment states:
>
> /*
>* Make sure user is the owner of the mount point
>* or has sufficient privileges.
>*/
>
> This makes se
> There are several issues that I think should be addressed with a single
> design, since they are closely related:
> 0) versioning of the filesystem
> 1) variable dnode_phys_t size (per dataset, to start with at least)
> 2) fast small files (per dnode)
> 3) variable znode_phys_t size (per dnode)
>
Andreas Dilger wrote:
> On Sep 17, 2007 08:31 -0600, Mark Shellenbaum wrote:
>> While not entirely the same thing we will soon have a VFS feature
>> registration mechanism in Nevada. Basically, a file system registers
>> what features it supports. Initially this will be
Mark Shellenbaum wrote:
> Andreas Dilger wrote:
>> On Sep 17, 2007 08:31 -0600, Mark Shellenbaum wrote:
>>> While not entirely the same thing we will soon have a VFS feature
>>> registration mechanism in Nevada. Basically, a file system registers
>>> what f
Pawel Jakub Dawidek wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 26, 2007 at 07:45:51AM -0700, Mark.Shellenbaum at Sun.COM wrote:
>> Author: marks
>> Repository: /hg/onnv/onnv-gate
>> Latest revision: 12bb2876a62ea4f4c1b28320f39a0d30334fdf21
>> Total changesets: 1
>> Log message:
>> PSARC/2006/465 ZFS Delegated Administra
Pawel Jakub Dawidek wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 26, 2007 at 07:45:51AM -0700, Mark.Shellenbaum at Sun.COM wrote:
>> Author: marks
>> Repository: /hg/onnv/onnv-gate
>> Latest revision: 12bb2876a62ea4f4c1b28320f39a0d30334fdf21
>> Total changesets: 1
>> Log message:
>> PSARC/2006/465 ZFS Delegated Administra
Ricardo Correia wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm having a problem with a simple sanity check performed by 'iozone -a'.
>
> Basically, iozone create a file with a permission value of 0 and then it
> tries
> to truncate it:
>
> 1) fd = open("file", O_WRONLY|O_CREAT, 0)
> 2) ftruncate(fd, 0)
>
> In zfs-fuse
Ricardo Correia wrote:
> On Wednesday 24 January 2007 00:04, eric kustarz wrote:
>> Right, i would verify your locks are working correctly (especially
>> make sure atomic_add_64() is truly atomic). Note, these locks are in
>> the ARC - so they are not in the VFS.
>
> Yes, atomic_add_64() should b
Ricardo Correia wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I was wondering if you could tell me what's the purpose of the CALLB_*()
> macros in the ZFS delete thread (see here:
> http://cvs.opensolaris.org/source/xref/on/usr/src/uts/common/fs/zfs/zfs_dir.c#446
> ).
>
You can just ignore those for the linux port. They
Darren J Moffat wrote:
> When I use ztest or zdb from the same bits I get a dangling dufs error:
>
Make certain you are unregistering the cryp property. If the webrev you
posted is still valid then it looks as if the unregistering of the
propery if #if 0 out.
-Mark
> mix:pts/1$ ztest -VVV
Ricardo Correia wrote:
> Ok, I took a look at the libc and the kernel implementation of rwlocks.
>
> I'm a little worried if I got this right, because most of the ZFS code can
> run
> both in userspace and in the kernel, which seem to behave differently in the
> RW_xxx_HELD() macros, and I nee
Ricardo Correia wrote:
> Ok, the changes are available here: http://www.wizy.org/files/zfs-linux.patch
>
> A few notes:
>
> 1) The patch includes the header Solaris/Linux differences. I'm not sure
> what's relevant, if anything. I have included some Solaris-specific macros
> and typedefs in sol
Ricardo Correia wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I've received a bug report of ztest failing in the exact same place as
> before,
> except now it's failing with ENOTSUPP (errno 95) instead of EBUSY (errno 16).
> It seems related to the Hot Spare work, just like before.
>
> Debugging output is in the forwarded
Ricardo Correia wrote:
> If I'm not mistaken, there are some new reserved pool names (raidz1, raidz2
> and spare) that weren't being properly checked for (in zfs_namecheck.c).
>
> There were also some errors that weren't being handled in libzfs_dataset.c
> (they were detected by gcc's warnings).
Pawel Jakub Dawidek wrote:
> Hi.
>
> I've almost all file system functions working.
>
> I started to run some heavy file system regression tests. They work. fsx
> wasn't able to break my port, but the test you can find here:
>
> http://people.freebsd.org/~kan/fsstress.tar.gz
>
> broke it.
>
> Webrev at:
>
> http://cr.grommit.com/~eschrock/zfs-prop/
>
I haven't looked at all of it, but here is what I've noticed.
zfs_main.c
Should use strlcpy() instead of strcpy() in get_callback().
What are your plans for ZFS_ABORT env variable? You should
probably remove it befo
Steve Gonczi wrote:
> Greetings,
>
> (a)The way I am reading the function header: upon failure *working_mode is
> supposed to contain all the permission bits
> we asked for, but did not get for whatever reason.
>
> (b)The way it is implemented, it returns any access bits we asked for, but we
>
24 matches
Mail list logo
