On Wed, Oct 17, 2007 at 07:05:59AM -0500, Eric Anderson wrote: > Kostik Belousov wrote: > >On Tue, Oct 16, 2007 at 12:20:59PM +0200, Arjan van Leeuwen wrote: > >>2007/10/16, Eric Anderson <anderson_at_freebsd.org>: > >>>Pieter de Goeje wrote: > >>>>On Sunday 14 October 2007, Eric Anderson wrote: > >>>>>Pieter de Goeje wrote: > >>>>>>On Saturday 13 October 2007, Rolf Witt wrote: > >>>>>>>Backtrace from crash tonight (after portsnap cron): > >>>>>><snip> > >>>>>> > >>>>>>># uname -a > >>>>>>>FreeBSD peanuts.homenet.local 7.0-PRERELEASE FreeBSD 7.0-PRERELEASE > >>>>>>>#121: Thu Oct 11 16:29:05 CEST 2007 > >>>>>>>rowi_at_peanuts.homenet.local:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/PEANUTS i386 > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>Sources from Builddate. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>Rowi > >>>>>>Eric sent me this patch: > >>>>>>http://www.googlebit.com/freebsd/patches/ffs_softdep.c-patch > >>>>>>which seems to be working great so far. I am still testing it, but I > >>>>>>think it fixed the problem. > >>>>>>To apply, cd /usr/src; patch < /path/to/patch and then rebuild the > >>>>>>kernel. > >>>>>> > >>>>>>Cheers, > >>>>>>Pieter de Goeje > >>>>>It doesn't actually 'fix' the problem, but I think it helps identify > >>>it. > >>>>>I'm not 100% certain if this is the right fix our not, but so far > >>>>>feedback has been good when running with this patch. > >>>>> > >>>>>Can somebody confirm that this patch is ok? > >>>>> > >>>>>Eric > >>>>Can you elaborate on what this patch exactly does / what the problem is? > >>>> > >>>>Pieter > >>> > >>>I think the problem is that blocks are being put in the worklist twice, > >>>but I'm not certain why yet. The patch reduces the chance of this > >>>happening by more often removing the block from the worklist instead of > >>>leaving it on. I think actually the patch is hiding the real issue more > >>>than anything, which is why I said it isn't fixing the problem, but > >>>because of the reports I've seen, I think we're sniffing in the right > >>>area. I'll be looking more into this soon, when I get another few > >>>minutes of free time and my debugger.. > >>I actually seem to be getting the panic more often with the patch (i.e. > >>twice in just 30 minutes with the patch, about twice per day without the > >>patch), while doing the same things as usual. The panic usually happens > >>when > >>I'm compiling or linking. Is that strange? > > > >Patch is wrong. Actually, it does put the dirrem to the proccessing twice > >when xp != NULL. > > Yes, exactly why I said 'it doesn't fix the problem'. In fact, I > actually did not post it to the list, and didn't intend for it to be > posted. I was hoping for feedback for further examination. > > Kostik - do you have any ideas on what is going on here? Did you see > the message in another thread that looked similar (it was regarding > gjournal)? No, I have no idea. BTW, some further information from the people that experience the problem could be helpful. For instance, UFS1/UFS2 size of the problematic fs/% of the space used are quotas enabled in kernel/active for the fs ? are softupdates on ? what block number is reported as being freed twice ? is it always the same ? what is the full fsck diagnostic after reboot ? The range of questions is so wide because I try to somewhat localize the search field down from "anywhere".
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:39:19 UTC