From owner-freebsd-arm@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Dec 18 13:50:06 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arm@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D12BD1065768 for ; Fri, 18 Dec 2009 13:50:06 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from tinguely@casselton.net) Received: from casselton.net (casselton.net [63.165.140.2]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C0678FC0C for ; Fri, 18 Dec 2009 13:50:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from casselton.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by casselton.net (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id nBIDo5XB028739; Fri, 18 Dec 2009 07:50:05 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from tinguely@casselton.net) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=casselton.net; s=ccnMail; t=1261144205; bh=bKnbEwnFgBb6aTeEQYCYafhVZzTlHnEIywSxg4fZSG8=; h=Date:From:Message-Id:To:Subject:In-Reply-To; b=N9v6ZULzVllKhD6r1qt0JKeeiWr8xGu49P3ckYn8DGXvVtxzwURH/vcfuneR/hv3h 4Uau3NaWD231d7evBeqDwx82XBXI5Md+zikkEubcelsId+nyqR4i+rVKhk9AFAXNIn hWfok7USz7q/gQezPtNTeZkAqy7WnNTsnSbSFOlo= Received: (from tinguely@localhost) by casselton.net (8.14.3/8.14.2/Submit) id nBIDo5X2028738; Fri, 18 Dec 2009 07:50:05 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from tinguely) Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2009 07:50:05 -0600 (CST) From: Mark Tinguely Message-Id: <200912181350.nBIDo5X2028738@casselton.net> To: freebsd-arm@freebsd.org, ruidc@yahoo.com In-Reply-To: <26843272.post@talk.nabble.com> X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.3.2 (casselton.net [127.0.0.1]); Fri, 18 Dec 2009 07:50:05 -0600 (CST) Cc: Subject: Re: fetch data corruption on local fs X-BeenThere: freebsd-arm@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting FreeBSD to the StrongARM Processor List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2009 13:50:06 -0000 > > Mark Tinguely wrote: > > > > Sounds like you are using preload. > > > > > Thanks for your reply, I'm not quite sure what you mean in your reply, but > presume that your suggestions may workaround this problem when performing > fetch operations against an md filesystem? if so, then this may be the case, > but my real target is UFS filesystem, I was just using md as an alternative > to the NFS-mounted filesystem suggested to test problem and workaround. > > If I have misunderstood, then please forgive me. You are correct, I misunderstood your problem; I thought your problem was in the md filesystem. --Mark.