From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Jan 17 12:34:28 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 0C3FF16A4CE for ; Sat, 17 Jan 2004 12:34:28 -0800 (PST) Received: from ferengi.borderworlds.dk (borderworlds.dk [62.79.110.124]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C1CB43D5C for ; Sat, 17 Jan 2004 12:34:26 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from xi@borderworlds.dk) Received: from borg.borderworlds.dk (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ferengi.borderworlds.dk (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB2645C42 for ; Sat, 17 Jan 2004 21:34:23 +0100 (CET) Received: by borg.borderworlds.dk (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 17EB6B83A; Sat, 17 Jan 2004 21:34:23 +0100 (CET) Sender: xi@borderworlds.dk To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org References: <20040117142950.GA28573@users.altadena.net> From: Christian Laursen Date: 17 Jan 2004 21:34:23 +0100 In-Reply-To: <20040117142950.GA28573@users.altadena.net> Message-ID: <86oet2z54g.fsf@borg.borderworlds.dk> Lines: 15 User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.3 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Subject: Re: 5.2-RELEASE: Possible bug in filesystem code? X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list Reply-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org 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 20:34:28 -0000 Pete Carah writes: > 2. The other source of a panic is if the background fsck detects a condition > which would cause the "preen" fsck to abort and give the "run fsck manually" > message at bootup, it (usually?) panics the system, usually with "freeing > freed inode". I can't think of how to handle this case any better; this > is a "hobson's choice" condition :-( That can only happen in two ways. Either there is a bug in softupdates which prevents it from working correctly, or your disks are reporting data as written when it is in fact only in the write cache. -- Best regards Christian Laursen