From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Jan 21 17:56:22 2010 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 7D53910656C1 for ; Thu, 21 Jan 2010 17:56:22 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from avg@icyb.net.ua) Received: from citadel.icyb.net.ua (citadel.icyb.net.ua [212.40.38.140]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C1A538FC21 for ; Thu, 21 Jan 2010 17:56:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: from odyssey.starpoint.kiev.ua (alpha-e.starpoint.kiev.ua [212.40.38.101]) by citadel.icyb.net.ua (8.8.8p3/ICyb-2.3exp) with ESMTP id TAA13091; Thu, 21 Jan 2010 19:56:16 +0200 (EET) (envelope-from avg@icyb.net.ua) Message-ID: <4B58953F.10404@icyb.net.ua> Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2010 19:56:15 +0200 From: Andriy Gapon User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (X11/20091206) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: David Naylor References: <201001201543.15818.naylor.b.david@gmail.com> <201001201834.48466.naylor.b.david@gmail.com> <4B573A8B.8080306@icyb.net.ua> <201001211952.20202.naylor.b.david@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <201001211952.20202.naylor.b.david@gmail.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.7 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: stacked unionfs freeze and crash FreeBSD 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, 21 Jan 2010 17:56:22 -0000 on 21/01/2010 19:52 David Naylor said the following: > On Wednesday 20 January 2010 19:16:59 Andriy Gapon wrote: >> Double-fault could indicate stack overflow. > > Thanks, I bumped KSTACK_PAGES to 32 (just to be on the safe side) and it is > working fairly well now. Only crash I have had since was related to tmpfs. > So far I have successfully build a port with 59 stacked unionfs (1 rw, 58 ro). Good that you found a workaround, bad that there is no better way to handle this overflow. Or, is there? -- Andriy Gapon