> On 07 Nov 2016, at 14:04, Christos Zoulas wrote:
>
> In article
> ,
> JaromĆr DoleÄ ek wrote:
>>
>> Anyway, IMO eventual change to allow fsck to DTRT after crash in
>>
On 07.11.2016 22:39, J. Hannken-Illjes wrote:
> My patch contains corruption issues only and it passes ATF and
> it passes my stress test which is a bit more than just some fsx.
>
> As -current currently corrupts file systems we should either fix it very
> soon or revert your changes completely.
> On 07 Nov 2016, at 21:53, Jaromír Doleček wrote:
>
> 2016-11-07 12:11 GMT+01:00 J. Hannken-Illjes :
>> It gets used when a block of block pointers has been deallocated and
>> brelsed, that is NOT written to disk. If we allow the
2016-11-07 12:11 GMT+01:00 J. Hannken-Illjes :
> It gets used when a block of block pointers has been deallocated and
> brelsed, that is NOT written to disk. If we allow the deallocation of
> this block to fail and ufs_truncate_retry() runs ffs_truncate again
> it will
Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
> At least for my evbppc64 build this fails to link because it uses
> mktemp and -Wl,--fatal-errors. Does it really need a random file name
> and can't just use an easier to predict for debugging name in the
> current directory?
New change is committed.
Alex
In article ,
JaromÃr DoleÄ ek wrote:
>
>Anyway, IMO eventual change to allow fsck to DTRT after crash in
>ffs_truncate() should go separately from the crash fix.
While fsck could be fixed, IMO, it is
On Sun, Nov 06, 2016 at 10:54:42AM +, Alexander Nasonov wrote:
> Module Name: src
> Committed By: alnsn
> Date: Sun Nov 6 10:54:42 UTC 2016
>
> Modified Files:
> src/distrib/sets/lists/tests: mi
> src/tests/dev/cgd: Makefile
> Added Files:
> src/tests/dev/cgd:
> On 07 Nov 2016, at 11:54, Jaromír Doleček wrote:
>
> 2016-11-07 10:25 GMT+01:00 J. Hannken-Illjes :
>> The first part should not be necessary. After the loop we should have
>> "i == last" -- from a quick look "i < last" is impossible.
>
>
2016-11-07 10:25 GMT+01:00 J. Hannken-Illjes :
> The first part should not be necessary. After the loop we should have
> "i == last" -- from a quick look "i < last" is impossible.
Yes, I know - it's just to make the diff vs 1.117 smaller and hence
easier to review. I
On Mon, Nov 07, 2016 at 06:38:54PM +1100, matthew green wrote:
> can we put this function into a netbsd-common file that all
> ports can reference, rather than repeating it? ie, this is
> identical to the arm version, and probably others.
Yes please, IIUC Nick and Rin are working on that.
> On 07 Nov 2016, at 00:11, Jaromír Doleček wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Nov 04, 2016 at 04:44:10PM +0100, J. Hannken-Illjes wrote:
>>> - This change results in "panic: ffs_blkfree_common: freeing free block"
>>> if I put a file system under stress (*1).
>>>
>>> - I suppose
11 matches
Mail list logo