From owner-freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Sep 30 16:20:10 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-bugs@hub.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7883310656B9 for ; Tue, 30 Sep 2008 16:20:10 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::28]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 675F18FC16 for ; Tue, 30 Sep 2008 16:20:10 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (gnats@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id m8UGKAPo028648 for ; Tue, 30 Sep 2008 16:20:10 GMT (envelope-from gnats@freefall.freebsd.org) Received: (from gnats@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.14.2/8.14.1/Submit) id m8UGKA8o028647; Tue, 30 Sep 2008 16:20:10 GMT (envelope-from gnats) Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2008 16:20:10 GMT Message-Id: <200809301620.m8UGKA8o028647@freefall.freebsd.org> To: freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.org From: Harald Hanche-Olsen Cc: Subject: Re: kern/119868: [zfs] 7.0 kernel panic during boot with ZFS and WD1600JS X-BeenThere: freebsd-bugs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: Harald Hanche-Olsen List-Id: Bug reports List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2008 16:20:10 -0000 The following reply was made to PR kern/119868; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Harald Hanche-Olsen To: bug-followup@FreeBSD.org, johan@giantfoo.org Cc: Subject: Re: kern/119868: [zfs] 7.0 kernel panic during boot with ZFS and WD1600JS Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2008 18:18:00 +0200 (CEST) For what it's worth, assuming it is the partition table that has gotten screwed up somehow, here are the the first 34 sectors of the disk that caused the panic described in my previous mail: http://www.math.ntnu.no/~hanche/tmp/baddisk.bin (Created by attaching the disk to a mac and running dd bs=512 count=34 on the device file. Not sure if binary attachments are OK here.) I forgot to mention that this is on 7.0-STABLE/amd64 as of 19 August (7.0-STABLE #3). But I also see the problem on 7.0-RELEASE/i386. - Harald