Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 01 Nov 2024 01:38:35 +0000
From:      bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org
To:        fs@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   [Bug 282449] UFS deadlock with install -S during freebsd-update
Message-ID:  <bug-282449-3630-HCbF9T2Gsv@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-282449-3630@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
References:  <bug-282449-3630@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D282449

--- Comment #6 from vfs-locking <Grau_Smue@md5hashing.net> ---
(In reply to Mark Millard from comment #5)
Notwithstanding that it looks like an I/O pileup, my impression is that the=
re
is something more.  My previous 2 or 3 encounters on VBox were all on hosti=
ng
ZFS with sync=3Ddisabled, and there were no errors on the host side at those
times since it continued other VMs and I/O.  I only tried sync=3Dstandard t=
his
time because I was out of good ideas in attempts to reproduce.

On the VPS encounter a few weeks ago, there could very well have been limit=
ed
I/O.  But not zero.  It was the VPS encounter that convinced me I was looki=
ng
at something other than a VBox bug, which is what I had previously thought =
this
was.  I had changed from SCSI to AHCI in the guest, and even read about a f=
ix
in VBox that could have been my issue, until it happened again.

>From there, it felt like a locking or race bug to me, that was happening
because of the high volume of fsync() and rename() calls via install -S.  I
know those are hard to reproduce, but thats why I was willing to try
repeatedly.

--=20
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.=



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?bug-282449-3630-HCbF9T2Gsv>