Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 14 May 2001 23:34:02 +0000 (GMT)
From:      Terry Lambert <tlambert@primenet.com>
To:        mckusick@mckusick.com (Kirk McKusick)
Cc:        mi@misha.privatelabs.com (Mikhail Teterin), kris@obsecurity.org (Kris Kennaway), cvs-committers@FreeBSD.ORG, cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG, ru@FreeBSD.ORG (Ruslan Ermilov), fs@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: [kris@obsecurity.org: Re: cvs commit: src/etc rc]
Message-ID:  <200105142334.QAA05923@usr06.primenet.com>
In-Reply-To: <200105132342.QAA21879@beastie.mckusick.com> from "Kirk McKusick" at May 13, 2001 04:42:55 PM

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > > Working under the assumption that the only time fsck is likely to fail
> > > in this manner  is if there are  FS errors which can't  be resolved in
> > > the background,  and which  may result  in further  FS damage  if left
> > > uncorrected, the  best option seems  to be  to take some  action which
> > > prevents this damage.
> > >
> > > The best series of actions might be the following:
> > >
> > > 1) Downgrade the FS to readonly mode.
> > 
> > Can't a  foreground fsck  be run  at this moment?  Having to  reboot for
> > anything is rather  ugly... I'm sure there  is a reason it  can not, I'm
> > just wondering, what that reason is. Thanks!
> 
> Indeed, a foreground fsck can be run once the downgrade to read-only
> has happened. However, doing so automatically is unlikely to be useful
> since nearly every error that would get us to this point will also
> cause an `fsck -p' to fail. So, at this point a system administrator
> is going to have to intervene to do a manual fsck. Once the downgrade
> to read-only has happened, no further filesystem damage can occur, so
> there is not a great rush to run the manual fsck. However, if the
> affected filesystem is something crucial like /var, the system may not
> run at all well until the problem is fixed.

Rebooting is a good idea, in any case, since you really can't
trust the results of programs run from a bogified FS.  So it
would not be safe, for example, to fsck it, get it clean, and
then remount it read/write, since the programs you are running
now came from a damaged FS (seriously damaged, if a background
fsck doesn't succeed).


					Terry Lambert
					terry@lambert.org
---
Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present
or previous employers.

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




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200105142334.QAA05923>