similar to: buildworld fails with clang

Hello, I'm experiencing a kernel panic that appears to be caused by zfs. No errors are making it into /var/log/messages, but here is the error message that appears on my screen after panic (transcribed): panic solaris assert BSWAP_32(sa_hdr_phys->sa_magic) == SA_MAGIC, file: /src/sys/modules/zfs/../../cddl/contrib/opensolaris/uts/common/fs/zfs/sa.c, line 1262 I can reproduce this by

Author: bmc Repository: /hg/zfs-crypto/gate Revision: 213bfe03af413cdf71c523fb076aaa65a6306a7e Log message: 6256581 System got a hang or a panic with dtrace+kmdb 6264573 unanchored dtrace_getpcstack is rather imprecise toward function end 6289517 dtrace doesn''t like fd_intr anymore 6291378 dtrace helpers can interfere with the use of kmdb 6295554 dtrace doesn''t report

Hi, I''m posting a question hoping someone will know the answer off hand thereby reducing my search time. :-) With USDT probes, the tracepoint is only installed by libdtrace itself, never by the drti ioctl. So whenever I run a program with an USDT probe, no tracepoint is installed. Only after I run the dtrace command the tracepoint is actually installed on the victim process. My question

Hi, Has anyone seen this before? I'm trying to build 7-STABLE on 6.3. I've removed everything from /usr/obj* but buildworld still fails. Maybe it's got something to do with recent dtrace MFC? -------------------------------------------------------------- >>> stage 1.2: bootstrap tools -------------------------------------------------------------- cd /usr/src;

Pawel, another one (though minor, I suppose) bug report: while playing with my poor pool, I tried to interact with it on -current, thus importing it with -f (without upgrading, of course). After reverting to RELENG_7, I found I no more can access history: root@moose:~# /usr/obj/usr/src/cddl/sbin/zpool/zpool history History for 'm': 2008-10-14.23:04:28 zpool create m raidz ad4h ad6h

Author: ahl Repository: /hg/zfs-crypto/gate Revision: a2677fc0a5fb6895ed56fc4698646ece44978a48 Log message: 4970475 There should be a stackdepth equivalent for userland 5084954 value of dip can be incorrect in autovec 6181505 dtrace sysinfo:::modload probe does not fire when using ''modload'' 6265417 schedctl-yield isn''t listed in sdt_subr.c 6272558 gcc and dtrace

Author: ahl Repository: /hg/zfs-crypto/gate Revision: b1ab97f77b0ad2a4fe2a43d9c5aac7259840bb90 Log message: 6370454 dtrace should support USDT probes in static functions Files: update: usr/src/lib/libdtrace/common/dt_dof.c update: usr/src/lib/libdtrace/common/dt_link.c update: usr/src/lib/libdtrace/common/dt_provider.c update: usr/src/lib/libdtrace/common/dt_provider.h

Gordon Messmer <gordon.messmer at gmail.com> wrote: > On 04/27/2015 12:28 PM, Joerg Schilling wrote: > > Up to now, nobody could explain me how a mixture of GPL and BSD can be legal as > > this would require (when following the GPL) to relicense the BSD code under GPL > > in order to make the whole be under GPL. > > The GPL doesn't require that you relicense

On 04/27/2015 12:28 PM, Joerg Schilling wrote: > Up to now, nobody could explain me how a mixture of GPL and BSD can be legal as > this would require (when following the GPL) to relicense the BSD code under GPL > in order to make the whole be under GPL. The GPL doesn't require that you relicense any non-GPL parts of the whole. It requires that the whole "be licensed ... at no

TB --- 2013-11-25 17:30:12 - tinderbox 2.20 running on freebsd-legacy2.sentex.ca TB --- 2013-11-25 17:30:12 - FreeBSD freebsd-legacy2.sentex.ca 9.1-RELEASE FreeBSD 9.1-RELEASE #0 r243825: Tue Dec 4 09:23:10 UTC 2012 root at farrell.cse.buffalo.edu:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/GENERIC amd64 TB --- 2013-11-25 17:30:12 - starting RELENG_8 tinderbox run for i386/i386 TB --- 2013-11-25 17:30:12 -

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 ============================================================================= FreeBSD-SA-10:03.zfs Security Advisory The FreeBSD Project Topic: ZFS ZIL playback with insecure permissions Category: contrib Module: zfs Announced:

Hi, If you have a custom kernel (and therefore have duplicates of everything in /kernel in your custom kernel) and have noticed that when you try to use anonymous tracing, dtrace adds multiple copies of the forceload directives to /etc/system, e.g.: * vvvv Added by DTrace * * The following forceload directives were added by dtrace(1M) to allow for * tracing during boot. If these

On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 11:41 AM, Warren Young <wyml at etr-usa.com> wrote: > > >>> 4. CDDL annoys a lot of people. >> >> The CDDL does not annoy people, this is just a fairy tale from some OSS enemies. > > The following irritates me, I am a ?people,? and I am not an OSS enemy: > > http://zfsonlinux.org/faq.html#WhatAboutTheLicensingIssue It is

Hi all, What is the correct way to give one non-root user the ability to use DTrace with providers running in a process by another user? Through the Web Stack project and some work by Ludovic Champenois and Nasser Nouri, we have done a bit of work to bring together parts of chime, the Web Stack Apache, Ruby and PHP providers, and stuff reused from the DTrace toolkit. It''s in

Les Mikesell <lesmikesell at gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 2:28 PM, Joerg Schilling > <Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de> wrote: > > > > > >> > "as a whole" means generally BUT allowing for exceptions. > >> > >> OK, great. That clears it up then. > > > > Maybe this helps: > > >

Les Mikesell <lesmikesell at gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 11:41 AM, Warren Young <wyml at etr-usa.com> wrote: > > > > >>> 4. CDDL annoys a lot of people. > >> > >> The CDDL does not annoy people, this is just a fairy tale from some OSS enemies. > > > > The following irritates me, I am a ?people,? and I am not an OSS

On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 2:28 PM, Joerg Schilling <Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de> wrote: > > > >> > "as a whole" means generally BUT allowing for exceptions. >> >> OK, great. That clears it up then. > > Maybe this helps: > > The BSD license does not permit to relicense the code, so you cannot put BSD > code under the

On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 4:04 PM, Joerg Schilling <Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de> wrote: >>> >> Yes, if you mean what is described here as 'the original 4-clause' >> license, or BSD-old: >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BSD_licenses > > Do you like to discuss things or do you like to throw smoke grenades? The only thing I'd like to discuss

Warren Young <wyml at etr-usa.com> wrote: > > The schily tools act as a container to publish the current code state. There is > > no such maintained web page. > > I was referring to the summary on the SourceForge page, where you just list the contents of the package without explaining why one would want to download it. I thought I don't need to make advertizing for

On Apr 27, 2015, at 10:10 AM, Joerg Schilling <Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de> wrote: > > Warren Young <wyml at etr-usa.com> wrote: > >> I was referring to the summary on the SourceForge page, where you just list the contents of the package without explaining why one would want to download it. > > I thought I don't need to make advertizing for well