From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Dec 31 16:02:31 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0DF5716A4CE; Wed, 31 Dec 2003 16:02:31 -0800 (PST) Received: from kientzle.com (h-66-166-149-50.SNVACAID.covad.net [66.166.149.50]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CD38B43D2F; Wed, 31 Dec 2003 16:02:29 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from kientzle@acm.org) Received: from acm.org ([66.166.149.54]) by kientzle.com (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i0102SkX016009; Wed, 31 Dec 2003 16:02:28 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from kientzle@acm.org) Message-ID: <3FF36393.6000109@acm.org> Date: Wed, 31 Dec 2003 16:02:27 -0800 From: Tim Kientzle User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD i386; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20031006 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: David Gilbert References: <20031229164130.GA797@pp.htv.fi> <16370.20382.81302.449649@canoe.dclg.ca> <16371.20373.212950.533985@canoe.dclg.ca> <20031231152453.G1441@bo.vpnaa.bet> <3FF35F60.1070803@acm.org> <16371.24594.660308.151100@canoe.dclg.ca> In-Reply-To: <16371.24594.660308.151100@canoe.dclg.ca> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit cc: Esa Karkkainen cc: "current@freebsd.org" Subject: Re: 5.1-R-p11 unable to "sync disks" when shutting down X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list Reply-To: kientzle@acm.org List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 01 Jan 2004 00:02:31 -0000 David Gilbert wrote: >>>>>>"Tim" == Tim Kientzle writes: > > Tim> What's needed is some way for fsck to mark a filesystem as > Tim> having a bgfsck in progress. Then fsck -F can check for that marker. > > Hrm. Isn't this done? Isn't there a 'special' snapshot created by > the bgfsck process? Or does this snapshot evaporate (have no links)? You've exceeded my expertise with that one. Also, using the snapshot as a flag wouldn't be robust against errors in the snapshot code itself. I note that fsck_ffs sets a flag "needs foreground check" if the background check fails. It might suffice to change the logic just a bit: * Set this flag when bg check starts * Clear the flag when bg check succeeds That would ensure that a foreground check gets done if the system rebooted during the bg check or if the bg check crashed for any reason. I'm not sufficiently familiar with fsck_ffs to tackle this, but it could be a pretty simple fix. Tim