From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Mar 10 08:32:54 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F297B16A4CE for ; Wed, 10 Mar 2004 08:32:53 -0800 (PST) Received: from main.gmane.org (main.gmane.org [80.91.224.249]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 28A7F43D2F for ; Wed, 10 Mar 2004 08:32:53 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from freebsd-stable@m.gmane.org) Received: from list by main.gmane.org with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1B16dX-00075k-00 for ; Wed, 10 Mar 2004 17:32:51 +0100 Received: from mulder.f5.com ([205.229.151.150]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Wed, 10 Mar 2004 17:32:51 +0100 Received: from atkin901 by mulder.f5.com with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Wed, 10 Mar 2004 17:32:51 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org From: othermark Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2004 08:32:48 -0800 Lines: 51 Message-ID: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: mulder.f5.com User-Agent: KNode/0.7.6 Sender: news Subject: Re: unexpected softupdate inconsistency X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2004 16:32:54 -0000 Manfred Lotz wrote: > At system startup fsck was started which produced the message: unexpected > softupdate inconsistency and also that some blocks could not be written > to. At the end fsck said: filesystem still dirty and I should run fsck > manually which I did but without any success. I have a large EIDE drive (30 gigs) with a large partition on it that was getting unexpected softupdate inconsistency on it when I did large writes (untar, remove, installworld, etc..). I turned off softupdates, and that did not help, so I turned off dma and just went to PIO mode. Things got much better from then on, however performance was miserable in PIO mode, so I took a chance and upgraded to -CURRENT to get atang. It now works great in -current with dma+soft updates. I'm assuming this was a incompatibility/bug between my controller and -STABLE, otherwise I would see a littering of complaints in stable mailing list. I found one pr in gnats mentioning one such incompatibility and softupdate inconsistencies. For reference: atapci0: port 0xfc90-0xfc9f at device 15.1 on pci0 [root]$ atacontrol mode 0 Master = UDMA33 Slave = BIOSPIO [root]$ atacontrol list ATA channel 0: Master: ad0 ATA/ATAPI rev 4 Slave: no device present the best test I could find for this was grabbing a large tarball, extracting it and then comparing the extraction 30 seconds later with the tar '-d' switch. > However, I'm really worried. Is there anybody I could do??? Try performing the tar test above (I used the openoffice 1.1 source tarball from ports which failed the compare everytime), and if you get differences then try booting up a 5.2.1 cd, mount your UFS r/w partition and try the tar test again to see if it's still there. If so, I would recommend a source upgrade to 5.2.1 or -current. -- othermark atkin901 at nospam dot yahoo dot com (!wired)?(coffee++):(wired);