svn commit: r286625 - head/sys/cddl/contrib/opensolaris/uts/common/fs/zfs

[Steven Hartland]

On 11/08/2015 11:51, Andriy Gapon wrote:
> On 11/08/2015 13:39, Alexander Motin wrote:
>> Author: mav
>> Date: Tue Aug 11 10:39:19 2015
>> New Revision: 286625
>> URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/286625
>>
>> Log:
>>    MFV r277425:
>>    5376 arc_kmem_reap_now() should not result in clearing arc_no_grow
>>    Reviewed by: Christopher Siden <christopher.siden at delphix.com>
>>    Reviewed by: George Wilson <george.wilson at delphix.com>
>>    Reviewed by: Steven Hartland <killing at multiplay.co.uk>
>>    Reviewed by: Richard Elling <richard.elling at richardelling.com>
>>    Approved by: Dan McDonald <danmcd at omniti.com>
>>    Author: Matthew Ahrens <mahrens at delphix.com>
>>    
>>    illumos/illumos-gate at 2ec99e3e987d8aa273f1e9ba2b983557d058198c
>>
>> Modified:
>>    head/sys/cddl/contrib/opensolaris/uts/common/fs/zfs/arc.c
> Alexander,
>
> thank you very much for bringing all these upstream changes into our tree.
> It seems that some of the changes, though, non-trivially overlap with
> FreeBSD-specific changes to ZFS code.  I think that this change is one
> of the examples.
> It would be good if a strategy of the resolution of each non-trivial
> conflict was described and possibly discussed.  Reviewing the change
> without knowing the general idea behind it is not always easy.
>
I actually eliminated most of the miss-matches between illumos and 
FreeBSD in this area pretty recently, so I'm not sure that there's 
actually many FreeBSD specific changes, hence conflicts. Given I worked 
in this area before I did also make a point of reviewing the upstream 
commit.

That's not to say it wouldn't be good to review these sorts of changes 
especially given the potential impact, however we don't have a very good 
track record (myself included) in reviewing things so I'm concerned that 
would just become a real progress blocker.

What do others think?

     Regards
     Steve