From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jan 22 13:15:38 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CD4DE16A400 for ; Mon, 22 Jan 2007 13:15:38 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from arne_woerner@yahoo.com) Received: from web30309.mail.mud.yahoo.com (web30309.mail.mud.yahoo.com [209.191.69.71]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 7DDA813C4C5 for ; Mon, 22 Jan 2007 13:15:38 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from arne_woerner@yahoo.com) Received: (qmail 9640 invoked by uid 60001); 22 Jan 2007 13:15:38 -0000 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:Date:From:Subject:To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Message-ID; b=j9Lo9h2z7ebX86HpkVVmVQogDiAZrZxs8Bm3zlgJFsrTiZKqP+fcuJscSsITKT92kNfLaxpq/2d2JXo7MmJ4EIvpEnPVCxSOAgz/BtAlwx+ymPf8mwPFAbiifnSqHg3/UKIX4bbXH8ywVkxaEmjW1eIuN3Ttqcmx0uQb+AhZ03A=; X-YMail-OSG: d2NPAw8VM1mnvUQW9IU.VdgOPK.n6nu8_O8DPI5NzGqWUmCFdnCPGIpOmRfbRQecpvvAOhEkU.L8Gh64tZksAwQsQSyMB4UVKOHphq0w69fUeJDKk1E- Received: from [85.212.26.75] by web30309.mail.mud.yahoo.com via HTTP; Mon, 22 Jan 2007 05:15:37 PST Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2007 05:15:37 -0800 (PST) From: "R. B. Riddick" To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org, CyberLeo Kitsana , FreeBSD Geom MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Message-ID: <916065.8298.qm@web30309.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Cc: Subject: Re: geom_raid5 livelock? X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2007 13:15:38 -0000 --- "R. B. Riddick" wrote: > It looks like, always the same consumer returns false data again and again in > this strange situation, although at the same time a dd to the same consumer > at the same offset returns data, that fits to the parity block. > > Does somebody here have an idea, why GEOM does that? > Could it be, that graid5 ruined somehow memory management? > Could it be, that GEOM is disturbed by simultaneous request? > I think, not graid5 ruined memory management, but UFS changes memory areas while a read request, that has to use the same memory area, is not completed. Hints: 1. Since I use for graid5's SAFEOP mode just graid5-private-memory for the parity check, no parity errors show up. 2. It was always -when I checked it- the use-data memory chunk, that had bad data. 3. That happened in a quite simple special case, too (I used just 2 disks, so that graid5 was like gmirror with 2 disks and round-robin balance). Further details see: http://perforce.freebsd.org/chv.cgi?CH=113310 Anyone here, who can validate my theory (it feels so _wrong_!)? :-) -Arne ____________________________________________________________________________________ Never miss an email again! Yahoo! Toolbar alerts you the instant new Mail arrives. http://tools.search.yahoo.com/toolbar/features/mail/