Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 20 Mar 2013 21:33:35 +0200
From:      Konstantin Belousov <kostikbel@gmail.com>
To:        John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org>
Cc:        Jeremy Chadwick <jdc@koitsu.org>, Michael Landin Hostbaek <mich@freebsd.org>, Rick Macklem <rmacklem@uoguelph.ca>, freebsd-stable@freebsd.org, Andriy Gapon <avg@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: Core Dump / panic sleeping thread
Message-ID:  <20130320193335.GK3794@kib.kiev.ua>
In-Reply-To: <20130320185808.GJ3794@kib.kiev.ua>
References:  <5148A454.1080303@FreeBSD.org> <424B99CB-A6D3-4219-A21E-62E5FB778E82@FreeBSD.org> <20130320132222.GC3794@kib.kiev.ua> <201303200943.20356.jhb@freebsd.org> <20130320185808.GJ3794@kib.kiev.ua>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

--4K1DhCUNwbLbQ12L
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 08:58:08PM +0200, Konstantin Belousov wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 09:43:20AM -0400, John Baldwin wrote:
> > On Wednesday, March 20, 2013 9:22:22 am Konstantin Belousov wrote:
> > > On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 12:13:05PM +0100, Michael Landin Hostbaek wro=
te:
> > > >=20
> > > > On Mar 20, 2013, at 10:49 AM, Konstantin Belousov <kostikbel@gmail.=
com>=20
> > wrote:
> > > > >=20
> > > > > I do not like it. As I said in the previous response to Andrey,
> > > > > I think that moving the vnode_pager_setsize() after the unlock is
> > > > > better, since it reduces races with other thread seeing half-done
> > > > > attribute update or making attribute change simultaneously.
> > > >=20
> > > > OK - so should I wait for another patch - or?=20
> > >=20
> > > I think the following is what I mean. As an additional note, why nfs
> > > client does not trim the buffers when server reported node size chang=
e ?
> >=20
> > Will changing the size always result in an mtime change forcing the cli=
ent to
> > throw away the data on the next read or fault anyway (or does it only a=
ffect
> > ctime)?
>=20
> UFS only modifies ctime on truncation, it seems.

No, I was wrong. ffs_truncate() indeed only sets both IN_CHANGE | IN_UPDATE
flags for the inode, and IN_UPDATE causes mtime update in ufs_itimes(),
called from UFS_UPDATE().


--4K1DhCUNwbLbQ12L
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (FreeBSD)
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=5MTz
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--4K1DhCUNwbLbQ12L--



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20130320193335.GK3794>