Date: Thu, 13 Jul 2006 09:33:20 -0600 From: Scott Long <scottl@samsco.org> To: Joao Barros <joao.barros@gmail.com> Cc: John Baldwin <john@baldwin.cx>, current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] amr(4) testers needed... Message-ID: <44B667C0.9010501@samsco.org> In-Reply-To: <70e8236f0607130819h155c8a46yc38eacb39378e30c@mail.gmail.com> References: <200607111451.22749.john@baldwin.cx> <70e8236f0607130819h155c8a46yc38eacb39378e30c@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Joao Barros wrote: > On 7/11/06, John Baldwin <john@baldwin.cx> wrote: > >> I have a patch for amr(4) that is a forward-port of a Scott Long patch >> for 4.x >> that fixes some severe data corruption with amr(4) + PAE on 4.x with > >> 4GB of >> RAM. I need the patch tested on current though so I can get it into >> HEAD and >> eventually into 4.x. The patch for head is at >> http://www.freebsd.org/~jhb/patches/amr_head.patch It shouldn't break >> anything and should basically be a nop. I think the patch will apply >> to 6.x >> (and possibly 5.x) as well. Thanks! >> > > I can test it on i386 without PAE. Is that test enough? > Note that this problem is only present when you're using a management app at the same time as heavy disk activity is going on. If you're not using a management app (and few people are, the lack of apps is why I didn't catch this in the first place), then you're completely safe. John's email might be taken as a little alarmist in this respect. Scott
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?44B667C0.9010501>