Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2000 11:49:21 +0100 From: Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven <asmodai@bart.nl> To: freebsd-stable@netscum.dk Cc: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: -stable panics with re-newfs'ing... Message-ID: <20000310114921.A17380@lucifer.bart.nl> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.3.96.1000202123927.23374W-100000@MEOWVAX.INT.TELE.DK>; from FLUFFEE@fluffy.gets.an.analprobe.dk on Mon, Mar 10, 2036 at 07:14:44PM %2B0100 References: <Pine.BSF.3.96.1000202123927.23374W-100000@MEOWVAX.INT.TELE.DK>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
-On [20000202 12:50], I am not any sort of Fluffy (FLUFFEE@fluffy.gets.an.analprobe.dk) wrote: >I reported this a while back to both -stable and -current, as I saw >this problem under both. I've now investigated with some different >hardware so it seems to be a general problem and readily repeatable. > >If I newfs a partition with, say, options `-b 65536 -f 16384' and then >try to newfs it again with the defaults, *POW* (oops, left the precise >panic message at home, it's dirty bufs) > >This is with -stable built a couple days ago. There are some `issues' with the ratio between blocksize and fragment size, at least, that is what Kirk McKusick and Peter Wemm were able to tell me. >Now I tried it also with -current built yesterday, and I was not able >to produce a panic, so it appears to be fixed in -current. That could be the patch Matthew Dillon committed. You could try and see if that patch works under STABLE. I am not sure how dependant that patch was on CURRENT though. -- Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven Network- and systemadministrator <asmodai@bart.nl> VIA NET.WORKS The Netherlands BSD: Technical excellence at its best http://www.bart.nl Tel: +31 - (0) 10 - 240 39 70 http://www.via-net-works.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20000310114921.A17380>