Core Dump / panic sleeping thread
kostikbel at gmail.com
Wed Mar 20 18:58:16 UTC 2013
On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 09:43:20AM -0400, John Baldwin wrote:
> On Wednesday, March 20, 2013 9:22:22 am Konstantin Belousov wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 12:13:05PM +0100, Michael Landin Hostbaek wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mar 20, 2013, at 10:49 AM, Konstantin Belousov <kostikbel at gmail.com>
> > > >
> > > > I do not like it. As I said in the previous response to Andrey,
> > > > I think that moving the vnode_pager_setsize() after the unlock is
> > > > better, since it reduces races with other thread seeing half-done
> > > > attribute update or making attribute change simultaneously.
> > >
> > > OK - so should I wait for another patch - or?
> > I think the following is what I mean. As an additional note, why nfs
> > client does not trim the buffers when server reported node size change ?
> Will changing the size always result in an mtime change forcing the client to
> throw away the data on the next read or fault anyway (or does it only affect
UFS only modifies ctime on truncation, it seems.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 834 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the freebsd-stable