Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
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>