Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2007 09:36:56 -0700 From: Marcel Moolenaar <xcllnt@mac.com> To: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> Cc: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org, Marcel Moolenaar <marcel@FreeBSD.org>, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, src-committers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/kern vfs_subr.c Message-ID: <2EA36547-0EB1-47B0-8F07-D394394CF3BD@mac.com> In-Reply-To: <20070327074334.GA52121@xor.obsecurity.org> References: <200703270529.l2R5TfVk087238@repoman.freebsd.org> <20070327074334.GA52121@xor.obsecurity.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mar 27, 2007, at 12:43 AM, Kris Kennaway wrote: > On Tue, Mar 27, 2007 at 05:29:41AM +0000, Marcel Moolenaar wrote: >> marcel 2007-03-27 05:29:41 UTC >> >> FreeBSD src repository >> >> Modified files: >> sys/kern vfs_subr.c >> Log: >> PowerPC is the only architecture with mpsafe_vfs=0. This is now >> broken. Rudimentary tests show that PowerPC can run with >> mpsafe_vfs=1. Make it so... > > If this is the vget panic via soft updates then a fix is pending for > that. Nevertheless mpsafevfs=1 is a good thing :) Maybe. I don't have the backtrace handy. It had to do with S/U, so it probably is then. I didn't see it on my amd64 box, so I assumed it was specific to PowerPC. Setting mpsave_vfs=1 solved it for me (or should I say avoided it for me? :-) I figured it's better to hunt down bugs in the mpsafe_vfs=1 case then it is in the mpsafe_vfs=0 case. This is not to say that mpsafe_vfs=0 can be broken, but rather that I prefer to work on improving the mpsafe_vfs=1 case... Hmmm, maybe I don't have S/U on amd64 box (I don't bother to partition my development boxes, so I typically only have a / mount that has S/U. Everything is basically over NFS...) -- Marcel Moolenaar xcllnt@mac.com
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?2EA36547-0EB1-47B0-8F07-D394394CF3BD>