From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Jul 24 15:17:54 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B52E106566B for ; Thu, 24 Jul 2008 15:17:54 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from asmrookie@gmail.com) Received: from fg-out-1718.google.com (fg-out-1718.google.com [72.14.220.157]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 00EDF8FC12 for ; Thu, 24 Jul 2008 15:17:53 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from asmrookie@gmail.com) Received: by fg-out-1718.google.com with SMTP id l26so2039482fgb.35 for ; Thu, 24 Jul 2008 08:17:53 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:sender :to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references :x-google-sender-auth; bh=aqMzyJ9ApFpImaCF6qRoGwNCHy9a9wDqgiA/vGL9of4=; b=TwfYueLvnBX241P2CW7eT7C8WePzGsh9iMy1x96LZJfOJ+DxE8bh5JHLJ3mMTkMEyO 6pxSFBhA34Gz8T/+osTdUSgBB3AoKTC0o6zt2+8WrOQNlyBaTKQZ1STXocO09uv0mPwE P2TxmCC+FHkEfKGwCL0ZXJeYNOq6krO+5de0U= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition :references:x-google-sender-auth; b=Pkp+ZPR1wt+hirF0MXAigeXgyIHffVtkPLd4hOmT5XWWBqoItpetGO2gCZfEYodnrT L1vRlVeeiMiEfxdyaEYdNqrHL2UcQJQoqdSfeGDXYNhKT6xeHAr/mNnOJkDeSx06gDah 1Jmy4xZV605858NlbXsNhMzqiCz1REPjZhTP0= Received: by 10.86.89.1 with SMTP id m1mr936618fgb.68.1216912672889; Thu, 24 Jul 2008 08:17:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.86.2.18 with HTTP; Thu, 24 Jul 2008 08:17:52 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <3bbf2fe10807240817l7aedc58fnf56e54155d7beda7@mail.gmail.com> Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2008 17:17:52 +0200 From: "Attilio Rao" Sender: asmrookie@gmail.com To: "Rink Springer" In-Reply-To: <20080723153849.GA5117@rink.nu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <487F32C6.5030502@lobraun.de> <3bbf2fe10807171306y59d30b13y868c1e27697412a7@mail.gmail.com> <48805EEE.90109@lobraun.de> <48806684.4000908@FreeBSD.org> <4880921C.10700@lobraun.de> <3bbf2fe10807190827k24c738c9s4f258ac006035b75@mail.gmail.com> <48833C50.8030507@lobraun.de> <3bbf2fe10807200904y32cc6d04n94bc262aa3c6c2be@mail.gmail.com> <3bbf2fe10807200926k5aa8fd2an7b2689f92bbba05d@mail.gmail.com> <20080723153849.GA5117@rink.nu> X-Google-Sender-Auth: 9df6260cfe5cd2d3 Cc: Lothar Braun , freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: panic: __lockmgr_args: unknown lockmgr request 0x0 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: Thu, 24 Jul 2008 15:17:54 -0000 2008/7/23 Rink Springer : > On Sun, Jul 20, 2008 at 06:26:04PM +0200, Attilio Rao wrote: >> 2008/7/20, Attilio Rao : >> > 2008/7/20, Lothar Braun : >> > >> > > Hi Attilio, >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > > can you please try this on the top of -CURRENT: >> > > > http://www.freebsd.org/~attilio/xfs2.diff >> > > > >> > > >> > > Thank you for the patch. The panic and the dead lock disappeard, but there >> > > is a new problem insteed. The commands >> > > >> > > mkfs.xfs /dev/ad8s4 >> > > mount -t xfs /dev/ad8s4 /home >> > > mkdir /home/lothar >> > > chown lothar:lothar /home/lothar >> > >> > >> > For what I remind, it is likely XFS is still not ready for writing. >> > This means you should only use it in read-only. >> >> Speaking of which, I think we should mark it again like a read-only fs >> until writing is not 100% ready. > > NTFS suffers from the same issue; it 'kind of' supports writes. The > result is that it supports writes in so limited circumstances that the > write support is mostly useless (and it even tends to lead to panics...) > > I think a better solution is to mount such filesystems r/o by default, > and only mount them r/w if explicitely asked to do so, for example by '-o > rw' - it would make things a lot clearer for our users when trying to > use filesystems, and brave souls are always welcome to force r/w that > way. > > What do you think? As long as you state that the write support is almost useless, I think the better thing is that we should simply drop the write support for the moment (and leaving the implementation there, of course, so that interested hackers can keep solidifying the support). Thanks, Attilio -- Peace can only be achieved by understanding - A. Einstein