From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Aug 2 07:59:56 2003 Return-Path: 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 1CB0837B401; Sat, 2 Aug 2003 07:59:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from vimes.aminor.no (vimes.aminor.no [213.187.177.2]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8D03643F93; Sat, 2 Aug 2003 07:59:54 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from eivind@aminor.no) Received: from [192.168.0.2] (rincewind.eivind [192.168.0.2]) by vimes.aminor.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 33A7C78D2C; Sat, 2 Aug 2003 17:00:05 +0200 (CEST) Date: Sat, 02 Aug 2003 17:00:59 +0200 From: Eivind Olsen To: current@freebsd.org Message-ID: <2712203.1059843659@[192.168.0.2]> In-Reply-To: <20030802091620.GB6331@cicely12.cicely.de> References: <1079.192.168.0.3.1059811884.squirrel@webmail.aminor.no> <20030802090052.GA25338@rot13.obsecurity.org> <20030802091620.GB6331@cicely12.cicely.de> X-Mailer: Mulberry/3.0.3 (Win32) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline cc: grog@freebsd.org Subject: Re: vinum bug? (Re: Yet another crash in FreeBSD 5.1) X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 02 Aug 2003 14:59:56 -0000 --On 2. august 2003 11:16 +0200 Bernd Walter wrote: >> Looks like a problem in vinum. The other backtrace was the same, right? > Please take a look at an older thread named (IIRC) vinum or geom bug? > Greg asked for special debug output, but it never happened again for me. > A real murphy bug - it happend on three machines once a day and after > Gregs response nothing happened over weeks. Are you thinking of the thread "vinum and/or geom panic on alpha" from 10th of June? I forgot to mention this but my system is i386 uniprocessor (Pentium2 at 450MHz). In case it's relevant, yes I do run vinum: vinum -> l 2 drives: D WHITE State: up /dev/ad2s1e A: 0/113046 MB (0%) D BLACK State: up /dev/ad0s1d A: 0/113046 MB (0%) 6 volumes: V var State: up Plexes: 2 Size: 6144 MB V usrlocal State: up Plexes: 2 Size: 6144 MB V tmp State: up Plexes: 1 Size: 255 MB V usr State: up Plexes: 2 Size: 6144 MB V home State: up Plexes: 2 Size: 8192 MB V storage State: up Plexes: 1 Size: 168 GB 10 plexes: P var.p0 C State: up Subdisks: 1 Size: 6144 MB P var.p1 C State: up Subdisks: 1 Size: 6144 MB P usrlocal.p0 C State: up Subdisks: 1 Size: 6144 MB P usrlocal.p1 C State: up Subdisks: 1 Size: 6144 MB P tmp.p0 S State: up Subdisks: 2 Size: 255 MB P usr.p0 C State: up Subdisks: 1 Size: 6144 MB P usr.p1 C State: up Subdisks: 1 Size: 6144 MB P home.p0 C State: up Subdisks: 1 Size: 8192 MB P home.p1 C State: up Subdisks: 1 Size: 8192 MB P storage.p0 S State: up Subdisks: 2 Size: 168 GB 12 subdisks: S var.p0.s0 State: up D: BLACK Size: 6144 MB S var.p1.s0 State: up D: WHITE Size: 6144 MB S usrlocal.p0.s0 State: up D: BLACK Size: 6144 MB S usrlocal.p1.s0 State: up D: WHITE Size: 6144 MB S tmp.p0.s0 State: up D: BLACK Size: 127 MB S tmp.p0.s1 State: up D: WHITE Size: 127 MB S usr.p0.s0 State: up D: BLACK Size: 6144 MB S usr.p1.s0 State: up D: WHITE Size: 6144 MB S home.p0.s0 State: up D: BLACK Size: 8192 MB S home.p1.s0 State: up D: WHITE Size: 8192 MB S storage.p0.s0 State: up D: BLACK Size: 84 GB S storage.p0.s1 State: up D: WHITE Size: 84 GB vinum -> -- Regards / Hilsen Eivind Olsen