Alexander Oganezov

This is a duplicate of https://daosio.atlassian.net/browse/DAOS-11901 for which there is already a patch in progress https://github.com/daos-stack/daos/pull/10578 (contains few other fixes besides free of dma buf)

> Any chance to review ?? This has a conflict and probably needs someone from a core daos team to review as it touches daos-level logic and not really cart.

> @soumagne , @frostedcmos , @liuxuezhao, @jolivier23 and @liw please could you have a look at this PR and tell me if there is still something to fix ? Thanks...

Handled in a different landed PR already

> ftest LGTM. On the topic of cart_ctl, what does this buy us? I know we use it to write some string to the log file, but what's the point?...

> Due to a lab power issue I restarted the PR. I also enabled the UCX Provider stage (where the problem is being seen) w/ Build with Parameters (future commits...

Unrelated test timeout failure (https://daosio.atlassian.net/browse/DAOS-15608) in [Test Hardware / Functional Hardware Medium / FTEST_osa.OSAOfflineReintegration.1-./osa/offline_reintegration.py:OSAOfflineReintegration.test_osa_offline_reintegration_without_checksum;run-agent_config-transport_config-aggregation-blank_node-checksum-container-dmg-hosts-ior-clientslots-iorflags-loop_test-mdtest-client_processes-wr_size-32K-pool-pool_capacity-rebuild-server_config-engines-0-storage-0-1-setup-snapshot-test_obj_class-test_rf-timeouts-c212](https://build.hpdd.intel.com/job/daos-stack/job/daos/view/change-requests/job/PR-14686/17/testReport/junit/FTEST_osa/OSAOfflineReintegration/Test_Hardware___Functional_Hardware_Medium___1___osa_offline_reintegration_py_OSAOfflineReintegration_test_osa_offline_reintegration_without_checksum_run_agent_config_transport_config_aggregation_blank_node_checksum_container_dmg_hosts_ior_clientslots_iorflags_loop_test_mdtest_client_processes_wr_size_32K_pool_pool_capacity_rebuild_server_config_engines_0_storage_0_1_setup_snapshot_test_obj_class_test_rf_timeouts_c212/)

ping reviewers

> I don't really mind either way but what is the incentive for keeping the first one and not the other ones ? are we just assuming that when we...

> > that's fine but imo it looks a bit clunky to have .oldest and .old naming, if I look at other services running on my linux box I don't...