Date: Tue, 7 Dec 1999 08:20:15 -0800 (PST) From: Matthew Jacob <mjacob@feral.com> To: Luoqi Chen <luoqi@watermarkgroup.com> Cc: jazepeda@pacbell.net, phk@critter.freebsd.dk, brian@CSUA.Berkeley.EDU, current@FreeBSD.ORG, vallo@matti.ee Subject: Re: mount(2) broken? Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.10.9912070819100.35050-100000@beppo.feral.com> In-Reply-To: <199912070716.CAA16646@lor.watermarkgroup.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, 7 Dec 1999, Luoqi Chen wrote: > > I've seen this exact same thing before too. In fact it was two rather > > annoying things, one being a single solitary last buffer that wouldn't > > sync and thus left the whole fs marked dirty, and then fsck would check > > it, see it was fine, but mount wouldn't recognize that it was clean. > > > > 'Course I saw this this morning too. Yes, with a new kernel, new devices, > > ata driver, and new world. 'Twas very odd. > > > > - alex > > > I'd like to add something about the last buffer wouldn't sync. This occurs > when a shutdown syscall is issued when the syncer process is asleep waiting > for a buffer write to complete. The write will never complete, because the > syncer won't be given a chance to run again, and the buffer will stay marked > as busy and become the buffer that wouldn't sync. I haven't thought about > a clean way of handling this situation, maybe some of you out there have > better ideas... Ah. That *could* be happening to me, but this happens even with a quiescent system (I mean, several times with nothing happening). To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.10.9912070819100.35050-100000>