From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Feb 12 04:51:03 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A8C8016A400 for ; Mon, 12 Feb 2007 04:51:03 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from anderson@freebsd.org) Received: from mh1.centtech.com (moat3.centtech.com [64.129.166.50]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7C8B713C4A8 for ; Mon, 12 Feb 2007 04:51:03 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from anderson@freebsd.org) Received: from [192.168.42.21] (andersonbox1.centtech.com [192.168.42.21]) by mh1.centtech.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l1C4p1t2077099; Sun, 11 Feb 2007 22:51:01 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from anderson@freebsd.org) Message-ID: <45CFF234.3010704@freebsd.org> Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2007 22:51:00 -0600 From: Eric Anderson User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.9 (X11/20070204) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Matthew D. Fuller" References: <20070211050825.GA70508@over-yonder.net> <45CFEF10.5050605@freebsd.org> <20070212044405.GB70508@over-yonder.net> In-Reply-To: <20070212044405.GB70508@over-yonder.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV 0.88.4/2553/Sun Feb 11 13:28:47 2007 on mh1.centtech.com X-Virus-Status: Clean X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=8.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.1.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.6 (2006-10-03) on mh1.centtech.com Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: softdep_waitidle: Failed to flush worklist [...] X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 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: Mon, 12 Feb 2007 04:51:03 -0000 On 02/11/07 22:44, Matthew D. Fuller wrote: > On Sun, Feb 11, 2007 at 10:37:36PM -0600 I heard the voice of > Eric Anderson, and lo! it spake thus: >> Aren't you putting the filesystem on top of the label here? >> Shouldn't you do something like: >> >> newfs -U /dev/md10a >> >> instead? > > Probably. Or just ignore the labelling step altogether, better, since > there's not meant to be multiple fsen on it. But then, it was written > as a quick PoC for the trouble with remounting, not as an example of > the best way to create a vnode-backed fs ;) > > True.. Just stuck out like a sore thumb to me.. Actually, it may not be harmful, but.. Anyway - does this happen if you do the same thing *without* soft updates enabled? Eric