Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 09 Aug 2012 20:48:23 +0200
From:      Harald Schmalzbauer <h.schmalzbauer@omnilan.de>
To:        attilio@FreeBSD.org
Cc:        stable@FreeBSD.org, daichi@FreeBSD.org, Pavel Polyakov <bsd@kobyla.org>
Subject:   Re: lock violation in unionfs (9.0-STABLE r230270)
Message-ID:  <502405F7.6070404@omnilan.de>
In-Reply-To: <CAJ-FndDkuXksyFD2Nd-S7Ty3N8boSk37=a2nYagMkguRYd1r%2Bg@mail.gmail.com>
References:  <op.v9l1byf89gyv16@pp>	<CAJ-FndAFMV2iHcMKvMruCP%2BHRzwQuY1Jcd_o6ZEnTCiPV8_8oA@mail.gmail.com>	<op.waqux6rr9gyv16@cel.home>	<5022840B.3060708@omnilan.de> <CAJ-FndDkuXksyFD2Nd-S7Ty3N8boSk37=a2nYagMkguRYd1r%2Bg@mail.gmail.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156)
--------------enig34E9508A3906AABEC440D3CF
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

 schrieb Attilio Rao am 09.08.2012 20:26 (localtime):
> On 8/8/12, Harald Schmalzbauer <h.schmalzbauer@omnilan.de> wrote:
>>  schrieb Pavel Polyakov am 06.03.2012 11:20 (localtime):
>>>>> mount -t unionfs -o noatime /usr /mnt
>>>>>
>>>>> insmntque: mp-safe fs and non-locked vp: 0xfffffe01d96704f0 is not
>>>>> exclusive locked but should be
>>>>> KDB: enter: lock violation
>>>> Pavel,
>>>> can you give a spin to this patch?:
>>>> http://www.freebsd.org/~attilio/unionfs_missing_insmntque_lock.patch=

>>>>
>>>> I think that the unlocking is due at that point as the vnode lock ca=
n
>>>> be switch later on.
>>>>
>>>> Let me know what you think about it and what the test does.
>>> Thanks!
>>> This patch fixes the problem with lock violation. Sorry I've tested i=
t so
>>> late.
>> Hello,
>>
>> this patch still applies cleanly to RELENG_9_1. Was there another fix
>> for the issue or has it just not been PR-sent and thus forgotten?
> Can you and Pavel try the attached patch? Unfortunately I had no time
> to test it, I just made in 5 free mins from a non-FreeBSD workstation,
> then you should be able to tell me if it works or not, even compiling
> it on a RELENG_9_1.
> Please try with INVARIANTS option on

Unfortunately I don't have a spare machine handy, but I ran a kernel
compile job in our lab and at least I can confirm that it applies +
compiles fine (i386 target on amd64, RELENG_9_1, options UNIONFS static
included on a heavy-nodevice-over-GENERIC kernel).

Thanks,

-Harry

P.S.: I'll have a nice testing machine vacant soon, so if no one else
has time to test, I can come back in about 2 weeks with results. But
that's far too late for 9.1-RELEASE I guess.


--------------enig34E9508A3906AABEC440D3CF
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc"

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.18 (FreeBSD)

iEYEARECAAYFAlAkBfcACgkQLDqVQ9VXb8iW8gCgvi4tg7xjVGO4FftcFCHPJzt8
OEwAoM4RF9ABALbttFjPrGLfeIVmbp3z
=DWLh
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--------------enig34E9508A3906AABEC440D3CF--



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?502405F7.6070404>