From owner-freebsd-geom@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Sep 12 18:37:36 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-geom@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-geom@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 178B316A501 for ; Tue, 12 Sep 2006 18:37:36 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from lulf@stud.ntnu.no) Received: from merke.itea.ntnu.no (merke.itea.ntnu.no [129.241.7.61]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9AD7B43D45 for ; Tue, 12 Sep 2006 18:37:35 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from lulf@stud.ntnu.no) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by merke.itea.ntnu.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id A57AF13C5C9; Tue, 12 Sep 2006 20:37:33 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost (textus5.itea.ntnu.no [129.241.56.155]) by merke.itea.ntnu.no (Postfix) with ESMTP; Tue, 12 Sep 2006 20:37:33 +0200 (CEST) Received: from m044h.studby.ntnu.no (m044h.studby.ntnu.no [129.241.135.44]) by webmail.ntnu.no (IMP) with HTTP for ; Tue, 12 Sep 2006 20:37:33 +0200 Message-ID: <1158086253.4506fe6d6d6fe@webmail.ntnu.no> Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2006 20:37:33 +0200 From: Ulf Lilleengen To: Mark Bucciarelli References: <20060912142232.GB440@rabbit> In-Reply-To: <20060912142232.GB440@rabbit> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit User-Agent: Internet Messaging Program (IMP) 3.2.8 X-Content-Scanned: with sophos and spamassassin at mailgw.ntnu.no. Cc: freebsd-geom@freebsd.org Subject: Re: gvinum raid5 in production X-BeenThere: freebsd-geom@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: GEOM-specific discussions and implementations List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2006 18:37:36 -0000 Quoting Mark Bucciarelli : > Is anybody using gvinum raid5 in production with 6.1-release? How is > it > going? > I run gvinum raid5 in 6.1 Release on a light production server, and I've not encountered any problems so far, but it _should_ work :) About the PR's you found I'm not sure of what's a gvinum bug or not of them, but at the thing about not checking NULL pointers for g_malloc is because when passing the M_WAITOK flag to g_malloc (or kernel malloc for instance), it is guaranteed to not return NULL because the flag tells malloc to wait for resources to be freed. -- Ulf Lilleengen