From owner-freebsd-current  Mon Dec  6 23:16:34 1999
Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Received: from lor.watermarkgroup.com (lor.watermarkgroup.com [207.202.73.33])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B8FD514CA2
	for <current@FreeBSD.ORG>; Mon,  6 Dec 1999 23:16:32 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from luoqi@watermarkgroup.com)
Received: (from luoqi@localhost)
	by lor.watermarkgroup.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id CAA16646;
	Tue, 7 Dec 1999 02:16:29 -0500 (EST)
	(envelope-from luoqi)
Date: Tue, 7 Dec 1999 02:16:29 -0500 (EST)
From: Luoqi Chen <luoqi@watermarkgroup.com>
Message-Id: <199912070716.CAA16646@lor.watermarkgroup.com>
To: jazepeda@pacbell.net, phk@critter.freebsd.dk
Subject: Re: mount(2) broken?
Cc: brian@CSUA.Berkeley.EDU, current@FreeBSD.ORG, vallo@matti.ee
Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG

> I've seen this exact same thing before too.  In fact it was two rather
> annoying things, one being a single solitary last buffer that wouldn't
> sync and thus left the whole fs marked dirty, and then fsck would check
> it, see it was fine, but mount wouldn't recognize that it was clean.
> 
> 'Course I saw this this morning too.  Yes, with a new kernel, new devices,
> ata driver, and new world.  'Twas very odd.
> 
> - alex
> 
I'd like to add something about the last buffer wouldn't sync. This occurs
when a shutdown syscall is issued when the syncer process is asleep waiting
for a buffer write to complete. The write will never complete, because the
syncer won't be given a chance to run again, and the buffer will stay marked
as busy and become the buffer that wouldn't sync. I haven't thought about
a clean way of handling this situation, maybe some of you out there have
better ideas...

-lq


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message