Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 1 Mar 2013 10:22:37 +0400
From:      Lev Serebryakov <lev@FreeBSD.org>
To:        Don Lewis <truckman@FreeBSD.org>
Cc:        freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.org, freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   Re: Panic in ffs_valloc (Was: Unexpected SU+J inconsistency AGAIN -- please, don't shift topic to ZFS!)
Message-ID:  <352538988.20130301102237@serebryakov.spb.ru>
In-Reply-To: <201303010511.r215BWoU092532@gw.catspoiler.org>
References:  <1698593972.20130228164821@serebryakov.spb.ru> <201303010511.r215BWoU092532@gw.catspoiler.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hello, Don.
You wrote 1 =DC=D0=E0=E2=D0 2013 =D3., 9:11:32:

DL> The fact that the filesystem code called panic() indicates that the
DL> filesystem was already corrupt by that point.  That's a likely reason
DL> for fsck complaining about the unexpected SU+J inconsistency.

DL> Incorrect write ordering that allowed the filesystem to become
DL> inconsistent because some pending writes were lost because of the panic
DL> might not be necessary, but this might have allowed an earlier crash
DL> where a full fsck was skipped to leave the filesystem in this state.
  As far, as I understand, if this theory is right (file system
 corruption which left unnoticed by "standard" fsck), it is bug in FFS
 SU+J too, as it should not be corrupted by reordered writes (if
 writes is properly reported as completed even if they were
 reordered).

DL> This panic might also be a result of the bug fixed in 246877, but I have
DL> my doubts about that.
  It was not MFCed :(

--=20
// Black Lion AKA Lev Serebryakov <lev@FreeBSD.org>




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?352538988.20130301102237>