Re: lock violation in unionfs (9.0-STABLE r230270)

2012-11-03 Thread Harald Schmalzbauer
schrieb Attilio Rao am 02.11.2012 15:21 (localtime): On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 11:11 AM, Harald Schmalzbauer h.schmalzba...@omnilan.de wrote: schrieb Attilio Rao am 29.10.2012 23:02 (localtime): On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 7:37 PM, Harald Schmalzbauer h.schmalzba...@omnilan.de wrote: schrieb

Re: lock violation in unionfs (9.0-STABLE r230270)

2012-11-02 Thread Attilio Rao
On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 11:11 AM, Harald Schmalzbauer h.schmalzba...@omnilan.de wrote: schrieb Attilio Rao am 29.10.2012 23:02 (localtime): On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 7:37 PM, Harald Schmalzbauer h.schmalzba...@omnilan.de wrote: schrieb Attilio Rao am 27.10.2012 23:07 (localtime): On Sat, Oct

Re: lock violation in unionfs (9.0-STABLE r230270)

2012-10-31 Thread Harald Schmalzbauer
schrieb Attilio Rao am 29.10.2012 23:02 (localtime): On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 7:37 PM, Harald Schmalzbauer h.schmalzba...@omnilan.de wrote: schrieb Attilio Rao am 27.10.2012 23:07 (localtime): On Sat, Oct 27, 2012 at 9:46 PM, Attilio Rao atti...@freebsd.org wrote: On Sat, Sep 8, 2012 at

Re: lock violation in unionfs (9.0-STABLE r230270)

2012-10-29 Thread Harald Schmalzbauer
schrieb Attilio Rao am 27.10.2012 23:07 (localtime): On Sat, Oct 27, 2012 at 9:46 PM, Attilio Rao atti...@freebsd.org wrote: On Sat, Sep 8, 2012 at 12:48 AM, Attilio Rao atti...@freebsd.org wrote: On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 4:52 PM, Harald Schmalzbauer h.schmalzba...@omnilan.de wrote: schrieb

Re: lock violation in unionfs (9.0-STABLE r230270)

2012-10-27 Thread Attilio Rao
On Sat, Sep 8, 2012 at 12:48 AM, Attilio Rao atti...@freebsd.org wrote: On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 4:52 PM, Harald Schmalzbauer h.schmalzba...@omnilan.de wrote: schrieb Attilio Rao am 09.08.2012 20:26 (localtime): On 8/8/12, Harald Schmalzbauer h.schmalzba...@omnilan.de wrote: schrieb Pavel

Re: lock violation in unionfs (9.0-STABLE r230270)

2012-10-27 Thread Attilio Rao
On Sat, Oct 27, 2012 at 9:46 PM, Attilio Rao atti...@freebsd.org wrote: On Sat, Sep 8, 2012 at 12:48 AM, Attilio Rao atti...@freebsd.org wrote: On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 4:52 PM, Harald Schmalzbauer h.schmalzba...@omnilan.de wrote: schrieb Attilio Rao am 09.08.2012 20:26 (localtime): On 8/8/12,

Re: lock violation in unionfs (9.0-STABLE r230270)

2012-09-07 Thread Attilio Rao
On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 4:52 PM, Harald Schmalzbauer h.schmalzba...@omnilan.de wrote: schrieb Attilio Rao am 09.08.2012 20:26 (localtime): On 8/8/12, Harald Schmalzbauer h.schmalzba...@omnilan.de wrote: schrieb Pavel Polyakov am 06.03.2012 11:20 (localtime): mount -t unionfs -o noatime /usr

Re: lock violation in unionfs (9.0-STABLE r230270)

2012-09-06 Thread Harald Schmalzbauer
schrieb Attilio Rao am 09.08.2012 20:26 (localtime): On 8/8/12, Harald Schmalzbauer h.schmalzba...@omnilan.de wrote: schrieb Pavel Polyakov am 06.03.2012 11:20 (localtime): mount -t unionfs -o noatime /usr /mnt insmntque: mp-safe fs and non-locked vp: 0xfe01d96704f0 is not exclusive

Re: lock violation in unionfs (9.0-STABLE r230270)

2012-09-06 Thread Harald Schmalzbauer
schrieb Harald Schmalzbauer am 06.09.2012 17:52 (localtime): schrieb Attilio Rao am 09.08.2012 20:26 (localtime): On 8/8/12, Harald Schmalzbauer h.schmalzba...@omnilan.de wrote: schrieb Pavel Polyakov am 06.03.2012 11:20 (localtime): mount -t unionfs -o noatime /usr /mnt insmntque:

Re: lock violation in unionfs (9.0-STABLE r230270)

2012-08-09 Thread Attilio Rao
On 8/8/12, Harald Schmalzbauer h.schmalzba...@omnilan.de wrote: schrieb Pavel Polyakov am 06.03.2012 11:20 (localtime): mount -t unionfs -o noatime /usr /mnt insmntque: mp-safe fs and non-locked vp: 0xfe01d96704f0 is not exclusive locked but should be KDB: enter: lock violation Pavel,

Re: lock violation in unionfs (9.0-STABLE r230270)

2012-08-09 Thread Harald Schmalzbauer
schrieb Attilio Rao am 09.08.2012 20:26 (localtime): On 8/8/12, Harald Schmalzbauer h.schmalzba...@omnilan.de wrote: schrieb Pavel Polyakov am 06.03.2012 11:20 (localtime): mount -t unionfs -o noatime /usr /mnt insmntque: mp-safe fs and non-locked vp: 0xfe01d96704f0 is not exclusive

Re: lock violation in unionfs (9.0-STABLE r230270)

2012-08-08 Thread Harald Schmalzbauer
schrieb Pavel Polyakov am 06.03.2012 11:20 (localtime): mount -t unionfs -o noatime /usr /mnt insmntque: mp-safe fs and non-locked vp: 0xfe01d96704f0 is not exclusive locked but should be KDB: enter: lock violation Pavel, can you give a spin to this patch?:

Re: lock violation in unionfs (9.0-STABLE r230270)

2012-08-08 Thread Attilio Rao
On 8/8/12, Harald Schmalzbauer h.schmalzba...@omnilan.de wrote: schrieb Pavel Polyakov am 06.03.2012 11:20 (localtime): mount -t unionfs -o noatime /usr /mnt insmntque: mp-safe fs and non-locked vp: 0xfe01d96704f0 is not exclusive locked but should be KDB: enter: lock violation Pavel,

Re: lock violation in unionfs (9.0-STABLE r230270)

2012-03-06 Thread Pavel Polyakov
mount -t unionfs -o noatime /usr /mnt insmntque: mp-safe fs and non-locked vp: 0xfe01d96704f0 is not exclusive locked but should be KDB: enter: lock violation Pavel, can you give a spin to this patch?: http://www.freebsd.org/~attilio/unionfs_missing_insmntque_lock.patch I think that the

Re: lock violation in unionfs (9.0-STABLE r230270)

2012-02-15 Thread Attilio Rao
2012/2/13, Pavel Polyakov b...@kobyla.org: http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=165087 Occurs simply trying to use unionfs: mount -t unionfs -o noatime /usr /mnt insmntque: mp-safe fs and non-locked vp: 0xfe01d96704f0 is not exclusive locked but should be KDB: enter: lock

lock violation in unionfs (9.0-STABLE r230270)

2012-02-13 Thread Pavel Polyakov
http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=165087 Occurs simply trying to use unionfs: mount -t unionfs -o noatime /usr /mnt insmntque: mp-safe fs and non-locked vp: 0xfe01d96704f0 is not exclusive locked but should be KDB: enter: lock violation Its possible to continue tho. Then locks