From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG  Wed Jan 28 12:54:34 2004
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5B4BE16A4CE
	for <current@freebsd.org>; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 12:54:34 -0800 (PST)
Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (critter.freebsd.dk [212.242.86.163])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 108BF43D31
	for <current@freebsd.org>; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 12:54:33 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from phk@phk.freebsd.dk)
Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by critter.freebsd.dk (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i0SKsWoZ001319;
	Wed, 28 Jan 2004 21:54:32 +0100 (CET)
	(envelope-from phk@phk.freebsd.dk)
To: "Robin P. Blanchard" <robin.blanchard@gactr.uga.edu>
From: "Poul-Henning Kamp" <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 28 Jan 2004 15:51:17 EST."
             <EE3D3FBAFFCAED448C21C398FDAD91AC013BDE74@EBE1.gc.nat> 
Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2004 21:54:32 +0100
Message-ID: <1318.1075323272@critter.freebsd.dk>
cc: current@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Processes blocked on ufs or getblk 
X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current
	<freebsd-current.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2004 20:54:34 -0000

In message <EE3D3FBAFFCAED448C21C398FDAD91AC013BDE74@EBE1.gc.nat>, "Robin P. Bl
anchard" writes:
>
>> >Given the lockedvnod message:
>> >Locked vnodes
>> >0xc7003378: tag ufs, type VREG, usecount 2, writecount 0, 
>> refcount 1, 
>> >flags (VV_OBJBUF), lock type ufs: EXCL (count 1) by thread 
>> 0xc6066d20 (pid 81250)
>> >        ino 2523831, on dev aacd0s1g (4, 26)
>> >
>> >Should I substitue aacd0s1g (disk+slice+part) for ad0 in your above 
>> >example ? Or should I be using disk or disk+slice ?
>> 
>> Just aacd0 should do.
>> 
>
>Unfortunately, that didn't help...Thanks for the suggestion, though.

Ok, it worked for the ata problem sos@ just committed a fix for,
but obviously the aac related problem is something entirely different.

-- 
Poul-Henning Kamp       | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
phk@FreeBSD.ORG         | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer       | BSD since 4.3-tahoe    
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.