From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Jul 24 17:02:42 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 69279106566C for ; Thu, 24 Jul 2008 17:02:42 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from yanefbsd@gmail.com) Received: from fg-out-1718.google.com (fg-out-1718.google.com [72.14.220.156]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EA59C8FC20 for ; Thu, 24 Jul 2008 17:02:41 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from yanefbsd@gmail.com) Received: by fg-out-1718.google.com with SMTP id l26so2079803fgb.35 for ; Thu, 24 Jul 2008 10:02:40 -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:to :subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; bh=Y962LyPYKaWTnoW0wSK+p1wy37Ns40GJ53ZY0YeF5+8=; b=sWfi7xFSWQ1VZ4nRUZICBAvI+iK5qrX48aRGaCuUw7hIR1pJGkvn7a03+UkYKiRc8v xrceqTAIg+nDwfKr/oripbSojM6dv7Jg3300HQkwzDm0WmPP1pzwS5/afjiM6cMrC6lQ 0k3uRHAlPhLWVyltii28rNnqAM0+amb0R2J4g= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition :references; b=pTzL0xUBT++Vb/LWqoP9QvJGvWtM1oW7vGsCXL0wTUgqgP0MhipedngzOWadMsKUMX Kjn+rfcoipLP/elPiX1qAOy6RHIEHqzAzm+TaKEEYYbFlw/osgqbF5Y57MRAw7jRrZ7e YFnFTmEFD5QgNbWyMKFyVh6l06CNvjXWAFbSc= Received: by 10.86.51.10 with SMTP id y10mr1069377fgy.6.1216918959700; Thu, 24 Jul 2008 10:02:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.86.51.1 with HTTP; Thu, 24 Jul 2008 10:02:39 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <7d6fde3d0807241002u66f90717rbb3b97efa76423fd@mail.gmail.com> Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2008 10:02:39 -0700 From: "Garrett Cooper" To: "Attilio Rao" In-Reply-To: <3bbf2fe10807240817l7aedc58fnf56e54155d7beda7@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <487F32C6.5030502@lobraun.de> <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> <3bbf2fe10807240817l7aedc58fnf56e54155d7beda7@mail.gmail.com> Cc: Rink Springer , 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 17:02:42 -0000 On Thu, Jul 24, 2008 at 8:17 AM, Attilio Rao wrote: > 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 Knobs per src.conf for fs experimental functionality? -Garrett