From owner-freebsd-hackers  Fri Feb 28 19:51:06 1997
Return-Path: <owner-hackers>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id TAA07045
          for hackers-outgoing; Fri, 28 Feb 1997 19:51:06 -0800 (PST)
Received: from parkplace.cet.co.jp (parkplace.cet.co.jp [202.32.64.1])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id TAA07036
          for <Hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>; Fri, 28 Feb 1997 19:51:03 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (michaelh@localhost) by parkplace.cet.co.jp (8.8.5/CET-v2.1) with SMTP id DAA16099; Sat, 1 Mar 1997 03:50:54 GMT
Date: Sat, 1 Mar 1997 12:50:53 +0900 (JST)
From: Michael Hancock <michaelh@cet.co.jp>
To: Thomas David Rivers <ponds!rivers@dg-rtp.dg.com>
cc: FreeBSD Hackers <Hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>
Subject: Re: Another installment of the "dup alloc"/"bad dir" panic problems.
In-Reply-To: <199703010101.UAA05470@lakes.water.net>
Message-ID: <Pine.SV4.3.95.970301124630.15992B-100000@parkplace.cet.co.jp>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, 28 Feb 1997, Thomas David Rivers wrote:

> > > It now appears that having the printf()s in disksort() affects the problem
> > > in a positive manner (that is, I'm not able to demonstrate the previous
> > > "non-writing" behaviour I had seen; the inode in question is reliably
> > > filled with zeros.)

The old "printf's makes the problem go away effect".  I hate when that
happens.  ;-)

Can you do a gcc -v and show us the flags you use to compile the kernel?
If missed these, in case you've already posted them.

Regards,


Mike