Date: Wed, 3 May 2006 14:45:44 -0400 From: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> To: Pavel Merdine <freebsd-fs@merdin.com> Cc: Kris Kennaway <freebsd-fs@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Stress testing the UFS2 filesystem Message-ID: <20060503184544.GB31172@xor.obsecurity.org> In-Reply-To: <213965528.20060503140355@merdin.com> References: <20060502193900.GA94069@peter.osted.lan> <1541458526.20060503003229@merdin.com> <20060502221306.GD95348@xor.obsecurity.org> <213965528.20060503140355@merdin.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--WhfpMioaduB5tiZL Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, May 03, 2006 at 02:03:55PM +0400, Pavel Merdine wrote: > Hello , >=20 >=20 >=20 > Wednesday, May 3, 2006, 2:13:07 AM, you wrote: >=20 > > On Wed, May 03, 2006 at 12:32:29AM +0400, Pavel Merdine wrote: > >> Hello , > >>=20 > >> Thank you for raising this problem again. I already tried to do that > >> in that list, but received an answer that kernel is intended to do > >> that. For example, you have a faulty disk. And you have a faulty > >> sector which happened to occur on the directory place. So each time > >> kernel reads this sector it panics. So it's initially hard to even > >> understand what happens. And also it leads to corruption and lost > >> files on other file system (each time). Imagine if you have 15 disks. > >> In this case you have many files lost just because of a small (and not > >> significant) fault. It's just a nonsense. > >> Personally, I just replaced bad_dir with error return. > >> By the way, there was some bug in fs in kernel that could lead to > >> panic even on clean filesystem (bad_dir as far as I remember). It is > >> very rare and it was fixed on DragonFly. As far as I remember a fix > >> for this was also commited to current recently. > >>=20 > >> I think that Linux is usually much smarter on this. By default it > >> remounts a file system as read-only in case it detects a filesystem > >> corruption. I would be very happy if FreeBSD could do the same, > >> because fs panics really hurt when you have many systems with disks. > >>=20 > >> Of course I think we could do patches to overcome corrupting panics, > >> but the core FreeBSD team would not accept this, as they are happy > >> with panics and corruptions they make to other filesystems. >=20 > > Of course not, don't make silly accusations :-) > > The problem is much more difficult to solve than "making the panic an > > error return". >=20 > I think that is you who call me silly. I did not mean what you wrote. > Where did I say that? I just said I made an error return for myself. And you accused the "core FreeBSD team" of being happy with panics and filesystem corruption. That's a ridiculous accusation, so you are treated with ridicule for saying it. Kris --WhfpMioaduB5tiZL Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFEWPpXWry0BWjoQKURAhZ7AJ9na9iet+7DsbhOB0SuhpmAbduaTgCZAdKu f7nn37Pf0Ssz2TpkzbBXeUM= =dSxH -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --WhfpMioaduB5tiZL--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20060503184544.GB31172>