From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Wed May 3 07:20:16 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D48D816A401 for ; Wed, 3 May 2006 07:20:16 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kris@obsecurity.org) Received: from elvis.mu.org (elvis.mu.org [192.203.228.196]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7791443D48 for ; Wed, 3 May 2006 07:20:16 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from kris@obsecurity.org) Received: from obsecurity.dyndns.org (elvis.mu.org [192.203.228.196]) by elvis.mu.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 834031A3C2C; Wed, 3 May 2006 00:20:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: by obsecurity.dyndns.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 92C855164F; Wed, 3 May 2006 03:20:14 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 3 May 2006 03:20:14 -0400 From: Kris Kennaway To: Bj?rn K?nig Message-ID: <20060503072013.GA2926@xor.obsecurity.org> References: <20060502193900.GA94069@peter.osted.lan> <1541458526.20060503003229@merdin.com> <20060502221306.GD95348@xor.obsecurity.org> <44584421.3000807@cs.tu-berlin.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="ReaqsoxgOBHFXBhH" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <44584421.3000807@cs.tu-berlin.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org, Kris Kennaway Subject: Re: Stress testing the UFS2 filesystem X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 03 May 2006 07:20:16 -0000 --ReaqsoxgOBHFXBhH Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, May 03, 2006 at 07:48:17AM +0200, Bj?rn K?nig wrote: > Kris Kennaway schrieb: > >On Wed, May 03, 2006 at 12:32:29AM +0400, Pavel Merdine wrote: > >>Of course I think we could do patches to overcome corrupting panics, > >>but the core FreeBSD team would not accept this, as they are happy > >>with panics and corruptions they make to other filesystems. > > > >Of course not, don't make silly accusations :-) > > > >The problem is much more difficult to solve than "making the panic an > >error return". >=20 > I'm interested in more information about this issue. Do you have a=20 > reference to an old discussion about this topic or do you like to=20 > explain it a little bit further for me (and probably others)? See the URL that Peter provided in his original post. The issue that he is testing is how well the filesystem behaves when you arbitrarily damage it and then run fsck (ideally, fsck should detect all of the damage and repair it). He seems to have found cases where fsck does not detect and repair the damage, leading to panics at runtime. You can ignore Pavel's reply since he didn't have anything to add to the discussion :-) Kris --ReaqsoxgOBHFXBhH Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFEWFmtWry0BWjoQKURAjj6AJ9+7UFC/IGSMy4kPmpxa1QL9+81gQCfVH62 EdYIhTuEK9KjgyqYgT/R+TI= =riDE -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --ReaqsoxgOBHFXBhH--