Date: Sat, 16 Jul 2005 19:26:32 +0200 From: Matthias Buelow <mkb@incubus.de> To: Lowell Gilbert <freebsd-stable-local@be-well.ilk.org> Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: dangerous situation with shutdown process Message-ID: <20050716172632.GG752@drjekyll.mkbuelow.net> In-Reply-To: <44k6jqof72.fsf@be-well.ilk.org> References: <20050715224650.GA48516@outcold.yadt.co.uk> <200507152342.j6FNg5Tx015427@drjekyll.mkbuelow.net> <20050716133710.GA71580@outcold.yadt.co.uk> <20050716141630.GB752@drjekyll.mkbuelow.net> <1121530912.17757.32.camel@zappa.Chelsea-Ct.Org> <44k6jqof72.fsf@be-well.ilk.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Lowell Gilbert wrote: >Well, break it down a little bit. If an ATA drive properly implements >the cache flush command, then none of the ongoing discussion is Are you sure this is the case? Are there sequence points in softupdates where it issues a flush request and by this guarantees fs integrity? I've read thru McKusick's paper in search for an answer but haven't found any. All I've read so far on mailing lists and from googling was that softupdates doesn't work if the wb-cache is enabled. mkb.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20050716172632.GG752>