From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Jan 17 08:04:20 2004 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 6896216A4CE for ; Sat, 17 Jan 2004 08:04:20 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.gmx.net (pop.gmx.de [213.165.64.20]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id BFBA443D46 for ; Sat, 17 Jan 2004 08:04:18 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from sebastian.ssmoller@gmx.net) Received: (qmail 23475 invoked by uid 65534); 17 Jan 2004 16:04:17 -0000 Received: from pD9E83F71.dip.t-dialin.net (EHLO [217.232.63.113]) (217.232.63.113) by mail.gmx.net (mp026) with SMTP; 17 Jan 2004 17:04:17 +0100 X-Authenticated: #15005775 From: sebastian ssmoller To: FreeBSD Current In-Reply-To: <20040116154309.W93165@carver.gumbysoft.com> References: <1074282376.907.3.camel@tyrael.linnet> <20040116154309.W93165@carver.gumbysoft.com> Content-Type: text/plain Message-Id: <1074355516.7787.10.camel@tyrael.linnet> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.5 Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2004 17:05:16 +0100 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: panic: handle_written_inodeblock: live inodedep 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, 17 Jan 2004 16:04:20 -0000 > > hi, > > i am running 5.2 release - anyone having seen such problems. i am asking > > cause i am not sure whether it is a fbsd or a hardware problem ... > > (re: subject) > > I haven't had it happen to me, but someone else has. Are your disks > particularly full? no they are not. disk usage is between 25% to 60% ... > > I believe the report was that it happened if you performed a large I/O > operation just after booting with a dirty filesystem, so it was running > concurrently with bgfsck. this could be a point - when i got that panic i had one before (hardware compatibility problems with geforce2, via kt 133 and amd) and i booted with a dirty fs (of course running bgfsck). in this situation i started portupgrade (ok possible not a good idea :) ... > > It might be repeatable with a generic snapshot. i am not sure whether i want to "repeat" it with my system - i could cause data loss, couldnt it ? so the advice would be to avoid havy io when running bgfsck ?? (as workaround) seb