From owner-freebsd-geom@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Sep 12 19:18:16 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-geom@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-geom@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 254EE16A417 for ; Tue, 12 Sep 2006 19:18:16 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from lulf@stud.ntnu.no) Received: from fri.itea.ntnu.no (fri.itea.ntnu.no [129.241.7.60]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9DC1343D76 for ; Tue, 12 Sep 2006 19:18:12 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from lulf@stud.ntnu.no) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by fri.itea.ntnu.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7244F8671; Tue, 12 Sep 2006 21:18:11 +0200 (CEST) Received: from gaupe.stud.ntnu.no (gaupe.stud.ntnu.no [129.241.56.184]) by fri.itea.ntnu.no (Postfix) with ESMTP; Tue, 12 Sep 2006 21:18:11 +0200 (CEST) Received: by gaupe.stud.ntnu.no (Postfix, from userid 2312) id 6FCD4CFF19; Tue, 12 Sep 2006 21:18:14 +0200 (CEST) Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2006 21:18:14 +0200 From: Ulf Lilleengen To: "R. B. Riddick" Message-ID: <20060912191744.GA28858@stud.ntnu.no> References: <1158086253.4506fe6d6d6fe@webmail.ntnu.no> <20060912184453.33677.qmail@web30313.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20060912184453.33677.qmail@web30313.mail.mud.yahoo.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i X-Content-Scanned: with sophos and spamassassin at mailgw.ntnu.no. Cc: freebsd-geom@freebsd.org Subject: Re: gvinum raid5 in production X-BeenThere: freebsd-geom@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: GEOM-specific discussions and implementations List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2006 19:18:16 -0000 On tir, sep 12, 2006 at 11:44:53 -0700, R. B. Riddick wrote: > --- Ulf Lilleengen wrote: > > Quoting Mark Bucciarelli : > > > Is anybody using gvinum raid5 in production with 6.1-release? How is > > > it going? > > > > About the PR's you found I'm not sure of what's a gvinum bug or not of > > them, but at the thing about not checking NULL pointers for g_malloc is > > because when passing the M_WAITOK flag to g_malloc (or kernel malloc > > for instance), it is guaranteed to not return NULL because the flag > > tells malloc to wait for resources to be freed. > > > As far as I understood GEOM it does not like to sleep in g_up or g_down > threads... So we cannot use M_WAITOK in gv_down()... What do you mean gv_down()? Gvinum does not use g_up or g_down as far as i can tell? -- Ulf Lilleengen