Andriy,
Can you give me some details about how you're able to reproduce this panic.
I would like to help debug this. I'm also looking into the range_tree()
panic, so any details you can provide would be very helpful.
If you can publish the crash dumps, I can also download them and take a
look.
Igor,
your suggestion was certainly a good one, however I took a path of a
lesser effort and tested my workload on the latest illumos kernel:
panic[cpu3]/thread=ff000bc56c40: assertion failed:
ba.ba_phys->bt_bytes == 0 (0x400 == 0x0), file:
../../common/fs/zfs/bptree.c, line: 293
based on your changeset number - it is old update:
https://github.com/illumos/illumos-gate/commit/26455f9efcf9b1e44937d4d86d1ce37b006f25a9
6052 decouple lzc_create() from the implementation details
we have a lot of others changes in illumos tree and i can say - i have no panic
on my system with
I am not yet convinced that the problem has anything to do with
miscompiled code. I am using exactly the same optimizations and exactly
the same compiler as the official FreeBSD builds.
On 22/06/2016 17:03, Igor Kozhukhov wrote:
> Hi Andri,
>
> i have DilOS with gcc-4.8,5 (+ special patches)
Hi Andri,
i have DilOS with gcc-4.8,5 (+ special patches) for illumos builds.
i had some problems with zdb - found it by zfs tests.
problem has been fixed by disable of optimization :
-fno-aggressive-loop-optimizations
also, i have added:
-fno-ipa-sra
but i no remember a story why i have added
I am getting the following panic using the latest FreeBSD head that is
synchronized with OpenZFS code as of
illumos/illumos-gate@26455f9efcf9b1e44937d4d86d1ce37b006f25a9.
panic: solaris assert: ba.ba_phys->bt_bytes == 0 (0x400 == 0x0), file:
