Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

zfsUnstable: 2.2.2 → 2.2.3-unstable-2024-01-22 #283730

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Feb 1, 2024

Conversation

toastal
Copy link
Contributor

@toastal toastal commented Jan 25, 2024

Should have patches for 6.7 compatibility

Description of changes

Things done

  • Built on platform(s)
    • x86_64-linux
    • aarch64-linux
    • x86_64-darwin
    • aarch64-darwin
  • For non-Linux: Is sandboxing enabled in nix.conf? (See Nix manual)
    • sandbox = relaxed
    • sandbox = true
  • Tested, as applicable:
  • Tested compilation of all packages that depend on this change using nix-shell -p nixpkgs-review --run "nixpkgs-review rev HEAD". Note: all changes have to be committed, also see nixpkgs-review usage
  • Tested basic functionality of all binary files (usually in ./result/bin/)
  • 24.05 Release Notes (or backporting 23.05 and 23.11 Release notes)
    • (Package updates) Added a release notes entry if the change is major or breaking
    • (Module updates) Added a release notes entry if the change is significant
    • (Module addition) Added a release notes entry if adding a new NixOS module
  • Fits CONTRIBUTING.md.

Add a 👍 reaction to pull requests you find important.

@RaitoBezarius
Copy link
Member

I'm not maintainer of ZFS 2.2.x series anymore.

@surfaceflinger
Copy link
Member

Unstable ZFS is now also compatible with Linux 6.2+ on aarch64, we could consider dropping boot.zfs.removeLinuxDRM

openzfs/zfs#15711
openzfs/zfs#15748 (comment)

@RaitoBezarius
Copy link
Member

I think it's still needed for ZFS 2.1.x series.

@surfaceflinger
Copy link
Member

Nope, it got backported to 2.1 too :) openzfs/zfs#15761

@RaitoBezarius
Copy link
Member

Nope, it got backported to 2.1 too :) openzfs/zfs#15761

Great!

@toastal
Copy link
Contributor Author

toastal commented Jan 25, 2024

Sounds like a separate commit by a maintainer :)

@toastal toastal force-pushed the zfsUnstable-2.2.3 branch 2 times, most recently from e2e0d44 to 1e04d8f Compare January 27, 2024 07:50
@toastal
Copy link
Contributor Author

toastal commented Jan 27, 2024

There were patches added to the staging branch. I will continue to rebase the default branch on this until the maintainers review it. I’m not touching DRM logic branches for this merge request… I just want 6.7 support.

Copy link
Member

@amarshall amarshall left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Tests fail, but due to a bug in the tests. I opened a PR to fix that, and will need that before this can be merged.

@amarshall
Copy link
Member

@toastal #284263 is merged now, so rebase off master should hopefully get tests passing.

Should have patches for 6.7 compatibility
Copy link
Member

@amarshall amarshall left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Change looks good, verified commit is on upstream zfs-2.2.3-staging branch and passed upstream CI, verified nixosTests.zfs on x86_64-linux.

Copy link
Member

@amarshall amarshall left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Not sure why review was re-requested, but re-approving.

@toastal
Copy link
Contributor Author

toastal commented Feb 1, 2024

Accident. Sorry. I was getting the link for Matrix in hopes of a quick merge post approval.

@adamcstephens adamcstephens merged commit ed837d2 into NixOS:master Feb 1, 2024
23 checks passed
@toastal toastal deleted the zfsUnstable-2.2.3 branch February 1, 2024 19:50
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

5 participants