deal with shortages of the VM maps where the backing pages are mapped
(usually kmem_map). Try to deal with this:
* Group all information about the backend allocator for a pool in a
separate structure. The pool references this structure, rather than
the individual fields.
* Change the pool_init() API accordingly, and adjust all callers.
* Link all pools using the same backend allocator on a list.
* The backend allocator is responsible for waiting for physical memory
to become available, but will still fail if it cannot callocate KVA
space for the pages. If this happens, carefully drain all pools using
the same backend allocator, so that some KVA space can be freed.
* Change pool_reclaim() to indicate if it actually succeeded in freeing
some pages, and use that information to make draining easier and more
efficient.
* Get rid of PR_URGENT. There was only one use of it, and it could be
dealt with by the caller.
From art@openbsd.org.
The code is still there if people want it, but these other RAID
types (using various DECLUSTERING and SPARING techniques) arn't being
used in practise. Saves about 100K on i386 GENERIC kernels.
device in the rare event that the one it wants is already in use.
Thanks to Wolfgang Stukenbrock for noticing the bug and filing the PR.
This fix addresses PR#14862.
the stuff that used to live in rf_types.h, rf_raidframe.h, rf_layout.h,
rf_netbsd.h, rf_raid.h, rf_decluster,h, and a few other places.
Believe it or not, when this is all done, things will be cleaner.
No functional changes to RAIDframe.
raidframevar.h - contains bits of rf_types.h, rf_layout.h,
rf_netbsd.h, rf_raid.h, and rf_decluster.h.
raidframeio.h - contains the bits needed for doing IOCTL's w/
RAIDframe.
These bits will be visible to userland.
being shutdown, then unconfigure the RAID set too. This fixes a number
of issues with doing proper unconfigures/shutdowns of multi-level RAID
sets.
Thanks to Jason Thorpe and Bill Squier for the ideas/suggestions on
how/where to do this, and to Bill Squier for testing.
Thus we choose "4 * number_of_columns" as a more reasonable
value (until someone comes up with something better).
This pretends to properly address PR#11989.
