I got these messages on 10 head, rev.254235, during 'filesystem full' condition.
Yuri
= log =
lock order reversal:
1st 0xff80f7432470 bufwait (bufwait) @ /usr/src/sys/kern/vfs_bio.c:3054
2nd 0xfe00075b5600 dirhash (dirhash) @
/usr/src/sys/ufs/ufs/ufs_dirhash.c:284
KDB: stack
On Saturday, August 17, 2013 1:42:07 pm Tim Kientzle wrote:
>
> On Aug 17, 2013, at 10:35 AM, O. Hartmann wrote:
>
> > On Sat, 17 Aug 2013 21:10:49 +0400
> > Boris Samorodov wrote:
> >
> >> 17.08.2013 13:36, O. Hartmann пишет:
> >>
> >>> I can reproduceable truncate the link in /etc/ to be NIL
It might be the same false positive I saw a couple weeks ago ... Davide said to
me:
| The LOR is a false positive.
| See the comment in sys/ufs/ufs/ufs_dirhash.c
| Also, switching motherboards is not related to this in any way. You'll
| eventually hit that LOR report, unless you disabled WI
18.08.2013 01:04, Hans Petter Selasky пишет:
On 08/17/13 23:55, Alexander Panyushkin wrote:
17.08.2013 19:41, Alexander Motin пишет:
On 17.08.2013 09:22, Hans Petter Selasky wrote:
On USB device FAT-32 file system. When I removed flash drive, the file
system has been unmounted.
Hi,
The
On 08/19/13 21:54, Alexander Panyushkin wrote:
18.08.2013 01:04, Hans Petter Selasky пишет:
On 08/17/13 23:55, Alexander Panyushkin wrote:
17.08.2013 19:41, Alexander Motin пишет:
On 17.08.2013 09:22, Hans Petter Selasky wrote:
On USB device FAT-32 file system. When I removed flash drive
Hi!
Recently I was playing with small socket timeouts. setsockopt(2)
SO_RCVTIMEO and found a problem with it: if timeout is small enough
read(2) may return before timeout is actually expired.
I was unable to reproduce this on linux box.
I found that kernel uses a timer with 1/HZ precision so it
Yes! Please file a PR!
-adrian
On 19 August 2013 12:33, Vitja Makarov wrote:
> Hi!
>
> Recently I was playing with small socket timeouts. setsockopt(2)
> SO_RCVTIMEO and found a problem with it: if timeout is small enough
> read(2) may return before timeout is actually expired.
>
> I was un
On Mon, 19 Aug 2013, Adrian Chadd wrote:
Yes! Please file a PR!
This sorta implies that both are acceptable (although,
the Linux behavior seems more desirable).
http://austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=369
On 19 August 2013 12:33, Vitja Makarov wrote:
Hi!
Recently I was playing with sma
On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 01:52:33AM +0200, Eitan Adler wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 18, 2013 at 9:39 PM, Tim Kientzle wrote:
> > Libarchive 3.x can treat them as extended metadata.
> > As a result, bsdtar doesn't see them at all (except as
> > additional metadata which can't be restored on FreeBSD).
This
