With this patch applied, it fails much faster for me completely locking up ZFS, usually after some minutes of light load (e.g. I was doing git gc when this happened):

[ERROR]::[4:655.0][CPU 0][pqisrc_heartbeat_timer_handler][178]:controller is offline
(da1:smartpqi0:0:65:0): WRITE(10). CDB: 2a 00 05 82 4f e0 00 07 e8 00
(da2:smartpqi0:0:66:0): WRITE(10). CDB: 2a 00 05 82 7d 98 00 00 58 00
(da1:smartpqi0:0:65:0): CAM status: Unable to abort CCB request
(da1:smartpqi0:0:65:0): Error 5, Unretryable error
(da1:smartpqi0:0:65:0): WRITE(10). CDB: 2a 00 05 82 67 98 00 07 e8 00
(da1:smartpqi0:0:65:0): CAM status: Unable to abort CCB request
(da1:smartpqi0:0:65:0): Error 5, Unretryable error
...
da0 at smartpqi0 bus 0 scbus0 target 64 lun 0
da0: <ATA WDC WD40PURZ-85A 0A80>  s/n WD-WX32D7088CCV detached
(da1:smartpqi0:0:65:0): Error 5, Unretryable error
(da1:smartpqi0:0:65:0): WRITE(10). CDB: 2a 00 05 82 38 28 00 07 e8 00
(da1:smartpqi0:0:65:0): CAM status: Unable to abort CCB request
(da1:smartpqi0:0:65:0): Error 5, Unretryable error
da1 at smartpqi0 bus 0 scbus0 target 65 lun 0
da1: <ATA WDC WD40PURZ-85A 0A80>  s/n WD-WX42D70CHZS7 detached
(da2:smartpqi0:0:66:0): CAM status: Unable to abort CCB request
(da2:smartpqi0:0:66:0): Error 5, Unretryable error
(da2:smartpqi0:0:66:0): WRITE(10). CDB: 2a 00 05 82 75 b0 00 07 e8 00
(da2:smartpqi0:0:66:0): CAM status: Unable to abort CCB request
(da2:smartpqi0:0:66:0): Error 5, Unretryable error
da2 at smartpqi0 bus 0 scbus0 target 66 lun 0
da2: <ATA WDC WD40PURZ-85A 0A80>  s/n WD-WXC2D90D7YAX detached
da3 at smartpqi0 bus 0 scbus0 target 67 lun 0
da3: <ATA WDC WD40PURZ-85A 0A80>  s/n WD-WX12DB0N8F4X detached
ses0 at smartpqi0 bus 0 scbus0 target 68 lun 0
ses0: <Adaptec Smart Adapter 3.53>  s/n 7A4263EAB3E     detached
pass5 at smartpqi0 bus 0 scbus0 target 1088 lun 1
pass5: <Adaptec 1100-8i 3.53>  s/n 7A4263EAB3E     detached
(ses0:smartpqi0:0:68:0): Periph destroyed
(pass5:smartpqi0:0:1088:1): Periph destroyed
Solaris: WARNING: Pool 'data' has encountered an uncorrectable I/O failure and has been suspended.

looking at this again, i'm not sure if the logic should be simply removed and not fixed instead -- i'll file a bug in case someone else would like to fix this properly

not compatible with recent changes

In D24428#661566, @papani.srikanth_microchip.com wrote:

In D24428#661402, @yuripv wrote:

In D24428#658934, @papani.srikanth_microchip.com wrote:

In D24428#657918, @imp wrote:

There's issues with applying this patch. Something seems to have gone amiss in its generation.

It almost applied cleanly to stable/12 branch, but not to the main branch:

% find . -name \*.rej
./sys/dev/smartpqi/smartpqi_mem.c.rej
./sys/dev/smartpqi/smartpqi_queue.c.rej
./sys/dev/smartpqi/smartpqi_defines.h.rej
./sys/dev/smartpqi/smartpqi_cam.c.rej
./sys/dev/smartpqi/smartpqi_misc.c.rej
./sys/dev/smartpqi/smartpqi_main.c.rej
./sys/dev/smartpqi/smartpqi_request.c.rej

In the main branch, it crashed patch :(.
A quick sample of the .rej files shows the diffs likely are easy to resolve by hand, but with such a large patch I'm leery to do so. Add '-l' to patch to cope with whitespace changes didn't seem to help.
So it looks like this patch needs to be regenerated and/or moved to git where patch generation and uploading is a bit more reliable.

(Also commented on a couple of nits that didn't look quite right in the copyright stuff, but that can wait for the patch to get done).

Hi,

• 12.0 stable branch and 12.2 main branch has two different source codes. I've pulled the 12.0 source code and applied the patch. (12.0 stable branch has bug fixes which is done by community but I do not see the same changes in 12.2 main branch because of that the patch is failing on 12.2 main branch).

"main" mentioned is literally main git branch, where this change should go first (and it's 14.0-CURRENT at the moment). I have HBA 1100-8i that is misbehaving under load, so I'd really like to try this patch -- could you please rebase this against main?

This patch is for 12.2 only, I will push a new patch separately to the main branch.

In D24428#658934, @papani.srikanth_microchip.com wrote:

In D24428#657918, @imp wrote:

There's issues with applying this patch. Something seems to have gone amiss in its generation.

It almost applied cleanly to stable/12 branch, but not to the main branch:

% find . -name \*.rej
./sys/dev/smartpqi/smartpqi_mem.c.rej
./sys/dev/smartpqi/smartpqi_queue.c.rej
./sys/dev/smartpqi/smartpqi_defines.h.rej
./sys/dev/smartpqi/smartpqi_cam.c.rej
./sys/dev/smartpqi/smartpqi_misc.c.rej
./sys/dev/smartpqi/smartpqi_main.c.rej
./sys/dev/smartpqi/smartpqi_request.c.rej

In the main branch, it crashed patch :(.
A quick sample of the .rej files shows the diffs likely are easy to resolve by hand, but with such a large patch I'm leery to do so. Add '-l' to patch to cope with whitespace changes didn't seem to help.
So it looks like this patch needs to be regenerated and/or moved to git where patch generation and uploading is a bit more reliable.

(Also commented on a couple of nits that didn't look quite right in the copyright stuff, but that can wait for the patch to get done).

Hi,

• 12.0 stable branch and 12.2 main branch has two different source codes. I've pulled the 12.0 source code and applied the patch. (12.0 stable branch has bug fixes which is done by community but I do not see the same changes in 12.2 main branch because of that the patch is failing on 12.2 main branch).

There is also https://reviews.freebsd.org/D28781.

In D28593#643293, @gbe wrote:

There is still the Makefile change missing.

@yuripv do you have any open issues for the man page?

I would approve it, but you have spend more time in reviewing it.

I'd rather not modify the contrib source, skip installing these, and use MLINKS instead.

some style.mdoc.5 cleanup

• only special case .Va after .It macro
• document the requirements in style.mdoc.5

With few fixes, don't use .Cm for arguments, don't add <> around arguments, and use .Nm Cm for subcommands.

Looks like usage message needs to be updated as well.

In D26966#618727, @pfg wrote:

In D26966#618725, @yuripv wrote:

Looks like export is only ever used in export_pam_environment(), where its return value is ignored.

Yes, I see :-/
So the change is useless, as are the checks for the pre-conditions.

It was really nice to see FreeBSD mentioned in a software security course though.

Looks like export is only ever used in export_pam_environment(), where its return value is ignored.

In D27623#617271, @0mp wrote:

Hmm, maybe it's better to keep the example shorter as in the err(3) manual page?

In D27623#617254, @0mp wrote:

@yuripv, let me know if that's a nice addition to the manual page or not. :) I understand it's basic stuff, but I feel like it's nice to show common patterns in a manual for reference.

As I was going through MFCing locale changes, I noticed one little (BIG) problem with this review/commit -- it forgot to actually install the updated sources to share/ subdirectories, so we currently ship what was previous version in share/.

In D17737#478038, @bapt wrote:

did you forget that one?

Committed in rS368390, not sure why phabricator didn't grok it.

• rewrite (actually copy and modify utf8-rollup.pl) mkwidths in perl, making it 300x faster compared to sh version
• add to README
• use pkgconf to get utf8proc cflags/libs

context