On 06/11/15 06:23, hiren panchasara wrote:
On 06/10/15 at 10:07P, Ian Lepore wrote:
On Wed, 2015-06-10 at 20:44 -0700, hiren panchasara wrote:
On 06/10/15 at 04:13P, Rick Macklem wrote:
Hi,
I just MFC'd a patch from head to stable/10 that defines some
tunables using CTLFLAG_RDTUN. Although the MFC didn't break
anything, the tunables don't get changed by the values in /boot/loader.conf.
By applying a patch like this:
SYSCTL_DECL(_vfs_nfsd);
int nfsrv_statehashsize = NFSSTATEHASHSIZE;
+TUNABLE_INT("vfs.nfsd.statehashsize", &nfsrv_statehashsize);
SYSCTL_INT(_vfs_nfsd, OID_AUTO, statehashsize, CTLFLAG_RDTUN,
&nfsrv_statehashsize, 0,
"Size of state hash table set via loader.conf");
they get set ok.
So, is this correct or have I done something stupid?
I believe that is correct. hans changed how they are declared with r267961
and now you do not need TUNABLE_INT() on -head.
And, if it correct, do I commit a patch like the above directly
to stable/10. (It seems that TUNABLE_INT() is discouraged for -head.)
That's the correct way, afaik.
Cheers,
Hiren
Is there a reason the sysctl tunable flag changes can't be MFC'd?
Leaving changes that widespread un-mfc'd just makes for lots of merge
conflicts as time goes on (and can also lead to merged code behaving
differently than expected).
Added Hans to answer the question.
Hi,
I wasn't sure if MFC'ing would break anything with regard to binary
compatibility, so the change was kept in -head and only the broken
SYSCTLs were fixed in 10- and 9- .
--HPS
_______________________________________________
freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
