Date: Fri, 23 Nov 2012 17:34:43 +0200 From: Andriy Gapon <avg@FreeBSD.org> To: Patrick Lamaiziere <patfbsd@davenulle.org> Cc: "stable@freebsd.org" <stable@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: Some new hardware with 9.1 does not reboot easily Message-ID: <50AF9793.3010602@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <20121123162531.66bedee3@mr129166> References: <50ACA518.4050309@digiware.nl> <50ACEEFF.8010001@FreeBSD.org> <50AD0A20.2070408@digiware.nl> <50AD0AC2.5070804@FreeBSD.org> <50AD0B29.6060602@FreeBSD.org> <50AD0F00.5020600@digiware.nl> <50AD13EE.8050901@digiware.nl> <50AD17E4.50104@FreeBSD.org> <50AD189D.4040902@digiware.nl> <50AD1941.2020108@FreeBSD.org> <50ADF362.2040803@FreeBSD.org> <20121123140932.3a6deff6@mr129166> <50AF88AA.1060003@FreeBSD.org> <20121123162531.66bedee3@mr129166>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
on 23/11/2012 17:25 Patrick Lamaiziere said the following: > I've applied your previous patch (#3, I think) to 9.1 with > few modifications but a quick test doing a "poudriere bulk" (lot of > ZFS mount/rollback) shows that the system quickly becomes instable. I > didn't find the time to dig into this. Please note that the patches are produced against head, so their applicability to stable is a moving thing. Sometimes they can apply just fine, but would be incorrect, because of some changes that are committed to head, but not MFC-ed yet. In either case, if you run into problems please report them. Because, you know, when I commit and MFC the changes you might be affected to a greater degree than during this testing phase. "Unstable system" is way way too vague to describe a problem. -- Andriy Gapon
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?50AF9793.3010602>