From owner-freebsd-i386@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Feb 23 18:40:04 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-i386@hub.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8640C16A402 for ; Sat, 23 Feb 2008 18:40:04 +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 81D8013C458 for ; Sat, 23 Feb 2008 18:40:04 +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 m1NIe4CT025077 for ; Sat, 23 Feb 2008 18:40:04 GMT (envelope-from gnats@freefall.freebsd.org) Received: (from gnats@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.14.2/8.14.1/Submit) id m1NIe4a5025076; Sat, 23 Feb 2008 18:40:04 GMT (envelope-from gnats) Date: Sat, 23 Feb 2008 18:40:04 GMT Message-Id: <200802231840.m1NIe4a5025076@freefall.freebsd.org> To: freebsd-i386@FreeBSD.org From: Volker Cc: Subject: Re: i386/120991: System crashes when manipulating fs snapshots X-BeenThere: freebsd-i386@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: Volker List-Id: I386-specific issues for FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 23 Feb 2008 18:40:04 -0000 The following reply was made to PR i386/120991; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Volker To: bug-followup@FreeBSD.org, bas@kompasmedia.nl Cc: Subject: Re: i386/120991: System crashes when manipulating fs snapshots Date: Sat, 23 Feb 2008 19:37:37 +0100 Bas, I'm wondering if you mind to show us your kernel config? A dmesg will also not disturb anybody. Please note, there have been some issues with HighPoint controllers under 7.0 lately and it might be a similar issue you're seeing (but that is beyond my view currently as I'm not following hardware specific threads if I don't have that hardware). If there's nothing wrong with your custom kernel config, I think it might make sense to have a WITNESS enabled kernel and performance measurement probably needs to be done, if the maintainers are not already aware of such problems. Thanks!