From nobody Tue Jan 02 06:49:13 2024
X-Original-To: freebsd-current@mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1])
	by mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4T44k36Qysz56X4N
	for <freebsd-current@mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org>; Tue,  2 Jan 2024 07:49:15 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from pi@freebsd.org)
Received: from fc.opsec.eu (fc.opsec.eu [IPv6:2001:14f8:200:4::4])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4T44k31xnTz3WkM
	for <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>; Tue,  2 Jan 2024 07:49:15 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from pi@freebsd.org)
Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org;
	none
Received: from pi (uid 104)
	(envelope-from pi@freebsd.org)
	id 1879e
	by fc.opsec.eu (DragonFly Mail Agent v0.13+ on fc.opsec.eu);
	Tue, 02 Jan 2024 07:49:13 +0100
Date: Tue, 2 Jan 2024 07:49:13 +0100
From: Kurt Jaeger <pi@freebsd.org>
To: Alexander Leidinger <Alexander@leidinger.net>
Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: ZFS problems since recently ?
Message-ID: <ZZOx6Zuoye8pt-zl@fc.opsec.eu>
References: <ZZG0RdFTqfbfPwf7@fc.opsec.eu>
 <5210dd54acbaa8d7705aa4f756e21d1a@Leidinger.net>
List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current <freebsd-current.freebsd.org>
List-Archive: https://lists.freebsd.org/archives/freebsd-current
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-current+help@freebsd.org>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:freebsd-current+subscribe@freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:freebsd-current+unsubscribe@freebsd.org>
Sender: owner-freebsd-current@freebsd.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <5210dd54acbaa8d7705aa4f756e21d1a@Leidinger.net>
X-Rspamd-Pre-Result: action=no action;
	module=replies;
	Message is reply to one we originated
X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-4.00 / 15.00];
	REPLY(-4.00)[];
	ASN(0.00)[asn:12502, ipnet:2001:14f8::/32, country:DE]
X-Spamd-Bar: ----
X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4T44k31xnTz3WkM

Hi!

> Am 2023-12-31 19:34, schrieb Kurt Jaeger:
> > I already have
> > 
> > vfs.zfs.dmu_offset_next_sync=0
> > 
> > which is supposed to disable block-cloning.
> 
> It isn't. This one is supposed to fix an issue which is unrelated to block
> cloning (but can be amplified by block cloning). This issue is fixed since
> some weeks, your Dec 23 build should not need it (when the issues happens,
> you have files with zero as parts of the data instead of the real data,
> and only if you copy files at the same time as those files are modified,
> and then only if you happen to get the timing right).
> 
> The sysctl for block cloning is vfs.zfs.bclone_enabled.
> To check if a pool has made use of block cloning:
>     zpool get all poolname | grep bclone

Thanks. I now used that sysctl and my testcase (testbuild of shells/bash)
and it did not crash.

-- 
pi@FreeBSD.org         +49 171 3101372                  Now what ?