Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2003 19:57:06 +0100 From: "Poul-Henning Kamp" <phk@phk.freebsd.dk> To: "Kevin Oberman" <oberman@es.net> Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: 5.2-BETA: giving up on 4 buffers (ata) Message-ID: <47528.1069873026@critter.freebsd.dk> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 26 Nov 2003 10:51:36 PST." <20031126185136.562385D08@ptavv.es.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message <20031126185136.562385D08@ptavv.es.net>, "Kevin Oberman" writes: >> Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2003 19:37:45 +0100 >> From: Matthias Andree <matthias.andree@gmx.de> >> Sender: owner-freebsd-current@freebsd.org >> >> Hi, >> >> when I rebooted my 5.2-BETA (kernel about 24 hours old), it gave up on >> flushing 4 dirty blocks. >> >> I had three UFS1 softdep file systems mounted on one ATA drive, one ext2 >> file system on another ATA drive and one ext2 file system on a SCSI >> drive. Both ext2 file systems had been mounted read-only, so they can't >> have had dirty blocks. >> >> At the next reboot, FreeBSD checked all three UFS file systems as they >> hadn't been umounted cleanly before. Makes me wonder if FreeBSD gave up >> on the super blocks... > >This looks like a GEOM related issue, although I am not completely sure >of this. Why do you think it has anything to do with GEOM ? When we give up on buffers, then superblocks are likely victims, in particular when softupdates dependencies are involved. -- 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.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?47528.1069873026>