Date: Sun, 20 Sep 1998 10:44:16 -0700 (PDT) From: Alex <garbanzo@hooked.net> To: Terry Lambert <tlambert@primenet.com> Cc: eivind@yes.no, julian@whistle.com, Don.Lewis@tsc.tdk.com, current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: softupdates & fsck Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.00.9809201037040.1461-100000@zippy.dyn.ml.org> In-Reply-To: <199809201004.DAA14983@usr06.primenet.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, 20 Sep 1998, Terry Lambert wrote: > > System (most likely only the console) froze, hit reset, fsck ran because > > the clean bit wasn't set, undeletable directories remained. Rebooted into > > single user mode, manually ran fsck -y which cleared the problem (or > > appeared to). I've also had problems with odd undeletable files, which I > > just booted into single user mode and clri'd (with the same kernel). [..] > In the worst case, soft updates malfunctioning would result in an FS > that is no worse corrupted than if you had been mounted async. Ahh, this is very reassuring ;) > In other words, no matter how far gone the thing gets, due to bugs > or any other circumstances, fsck is required to be able to correct > the FS to an internally self-consistent state. > > Unless the files could not be deleted because of flags being set > (man chflags), in which case, you were required to boot in single > user because the secure level was wrong. This could have occurred > if you gradually updated your system, but didn't update your > rc files in lockstep with your configuration data (ie: the secure > level was changed before the fsck, and write access to the devices > is denied). Bad file descriptor (what I'm seeing) != operation not permitted (rm -rf'ing some sort of immutable file). > It's time for you to provide a means of duplicating the problem for > Julian and Kirk. I have limited access to the test-beds necessary > to track something like this to resolution (Julian would be upset > if I hacked his reference systems). I have access to my one system, which I'm not too eager to try and repeatably trash (I'm quite fond of my data). However, I'd suggest running make world, waiting for about 10 minutes (or just let it get running a little bit) and hit reset, of course with softupdates enabled drives (The only place I saw corruption was on the drive that has /usr/obj, which was the only drive I think being actively written to). > You should also use the most recent code. I can't remember if > by using code from the 12th you are missing as few as one patch > or as many as three... [...] > You may want to try Justin's modifications to the way tagged command > queues are managed (posted about to this list, today), since it > impacts the area that I am suspicious of, in particular. Once I finally get a buildworld done, I might try it. > No, but I feel like I am... 8-(. > > I have *seen* working soft updates technology; Matt Day integrated > it from the Ganger/Patt Appendix A into our port of the Heidemann > framework to Windows 95 more than two years ago. I *know* it's an > amazing and useful technology, when it's working. > > The coincidence of bugs not previously reported and the CAM integration > has made me suspicious; but perhaps people were just lax in reporting > problems, since I was under the impression everythin was working fine. Well, it does work, just not recover well from a crash. If anything, I didn't freeze my box up too often over the time that I've had softupdates enabled. And, I certianly didn't freeze it too often while it was churning the disks. - alex To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.00.9809201037040.1461-100000>