Open
Conversation
Author
|
testing: installed the ZFS changes and this Propolis on mb-1. In the linux guest VM, created a zpool on a local disk and used |
iximeow
reviewed
Apr 8, 2026
Member
iximeow
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
nice, this will be nice to have, thanks for working on this. hopefully none of the comments are too surprising!
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This implements #990. It makes propolis advertise support for the "Dataset Management" NVMe command. It uses
ioctl(DKIOCFREE)to pass these requests through to local disks (FileBackend). The requests are ignored on distributed disks (Crucible).Note that our devices are NVME 1.0e, which specifies that the disk "may" deallocate all provided ranges, and "shall return all zeros, all ones, or the last data written to the associated LBA". The 1.0e spec has no mechanism for telling the guest which of these semantics is actually happening. Future work may include migrating to NVME 1.1 or later, which can use the DRB (Deallocation Read Behavior) field to tell the guest whether the blocks are actually zeroed or not.
This requires the changes for https://github.com/oxidecomputer/stlouis/issues/940 which are under review here.
A few details to be aware of or provide input on:
oncsfield). I think this is OK since there is no live migration currently (even if the VM has no local disks). So each time a VM boots, it will be on a specific version of Propolis which either advertises Dataset Management, or not.block::Operation::Discardnow means to discard multiple ranges from the client-provided list, not just one range.probes::block_begin_discardused to take an offset and length, but I have changed it to take the number of ranges instead. Is this OK? Are there consumers that need to change? We could fire a probe for each range, but then there would be multiple “begin” probes for one devqid, which could be confusing because begin/complete probes would not match up. Similar forprobes::nvme_discard_enqueue.VirtualDiskStats, should we add stats for Discard? How do we monitor these? Would we need to add support in consumers?