Date: Sat, 5 Oct 2002 10:49:26 -0700 (PDT) From: "Steven G. Kargl" <kargl@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> To: Robert Watson <rwatson@freebsd.org> Cc: "Brian F. Feldman" <green@freebsd.org>, freebsd-current@freebsd.org, kirk@freebsd.org Subject: Re: panic from _mutex_assert in kern_lock.c Message-ID: <200210051749.g95HnQwb014502@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> In-Reply-To: <Pine.NEB.3.96L.1021005132846.64999n-100000@fledge.watson.org> "from Robert Watson at Oct 5, 2002 01:30:36 pm"
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Robert Watson said: > > On Sat, 5 Oct 2002, Steven G. Kargl wrote: > > > One other point, the machine was doing a background fsck on /var. Does > > a background fsck go through ffs_snapshot()? > > Yes -- the background file system checker creates a snapshot of the file > system in the un-checked state, then performs the check against the > snapshot. It trickles the changes generated against the snapshot into the > live file system. Because of the conservative nature of failures with > soft updates, the only theoretical inconsistencies relate either to marked > as non-free yet unreferenced resources, and referenece counts that are > high. The snapshot allows fsck a consistent view of the file system "as > it was" so that it doesn't get confused by the live file system. > Thanks, Brian and Robert. Of course, the above makes sense when someone explains it to you. -- Steve http://troutmask.apl.washington.edu/~kargl/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200210051749.g95HnQwb014502>