Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 10 Oct 2011 12:35:43 +0300
From:      Kostik Belousov <kostikbel@gmail.com>
To:        Garrett Cooper <yanegomi@gmail.com>
Cc:        Kirk McKusick <mckusick@mckusick.com>, Attilio Rao <attilio@freebsd.org>, Xin LI <delphij@freebsd.org>, freebsd-fs@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Need to force sync(2) before umounting UFS1 filesystems?
Message-ID:  <20111010093543.GV1511@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua>
In-Reply-To: <CAGH67wSfgQ%2BDg0qQxkiKh4Uzt3E_J3rRL_=2PkbNvB=ii1f0LQ@mail.gmail.com>
References:  <CAGH67wSYmcxJCbTMVL%2BqWzbLojiCiBmRF98yaNL4b3d3LbvbYw@mail.gmail.com> <201110012137.p91Lb6FI093841@chez.mckusick.com> <CAGH67wS9G5Co%2BCjaVWrc-VX-mmp7CoEo0Cw7ysqpwkOMowRYCQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAGH67wSfgQ%2BDg0qQxkiKh4Uzt3E_J3rRL_=2PkbNvB=ii1f0LQ@mail.gmail.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

--ipBCFTroSgA6x0qa
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=koi8-r
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Sun, Oct 09, 2011 at 03:37:22PM -0700, Garrett Cooper wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 9, 2011 at 3:22 PM, Garrett Cooper <yanegomi@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Sat, Oct 1, 2011 at 2:37 PM, Kirk McKusick <mckusick@mckusick.com> w=
rote:
> >>> Date: Sat, 1 Oct 2011 12:44:04 -0700
> >>> Subject: Re: Need to force sync(2) before umounting UFS1 filesystems?
> >>> From: Garrett Cooper <yanegomi@gmail.com>
> >>> To: Attilio Rao <attilio@freebsd.org>
> >>> Cc: Kostik Belousov <kostikbel@gmail.com>,
> >>> =9A =9A =9A =9A Kirk McKusick <mckusick@mckusick.com>, freebsd-fs@fre=
ebsd.org,
> >>> =9A =9A =9A =9A Xin LI <delphij@freebsd.org>
> >>>
> >>> Ok. Now that I know this is the direction you guys want to go, I'll
> >>> start testing the change.
> >>
> >> Thanks for throwing some testing at this. Please test my latest
> >> proposed change (included below so you do not have to dig through
> >> earlier email) as I believe that it has the least likelyhood of
> >> problems and is what I am currently proposing to put in.
> >
> > I apologize for not getting this done sooner. It passes a smoke test
> > with the following filesystems:
> >
> > nfs
> > nullfs
> > smbfs
> > unionfs
> > ufs
> > zfs
> >
> > I'll be running more extensive stress tests soon, but it looks like a
> > good step forward.
>=20
> Forgot to note: my FreeNAS builds nanobsd no longer fail with the
> attached patch after I remove my sync hacks :).

The real case to test is the NFS mount which is wedged due to
hung/unresponsive NFS server. I have high suspect that the patch
could introduce the unkillable hung unmount process.

--ipBCFTroSgA6x0qa
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

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

iEYEARECAAYFAk6SvG8ACgkQC3+MBN1Mb4j7egCg0LlstdvWLwP1Db5TcdLzjhtv
Lo4AoI1OFjZffYs1Fmc8RJGy9fz7AeLF
=SVoo
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--ipBCFTroSgA6x0qa--



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20111010093543.GV1511>