[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]
Re: panic: ffs_valloc: dup alloc
On Mar 20, 2010, at 3:49 PM, David Holland wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 20, 2010 at 10:29:44PM +1030, Brett Lymn wrote:
>> I have given up on suspending because my filesystems would be
>> corrupted with monotonous regularity. The chances of a corruption
>> seems to increase with the amount of disk activity happening on
>> suspend. It seems like something is not being flushed (or not being
>> marked as flushed) when the suspend happens.
> We don't support suspend-to-disk, right? So the contents of kernel
> memory are supposed to be preserved in this suspend? Because if so,
> unflushed buffers shouldn't matter. One would think.
> That suggests that something is flushing buffers to a device that's
> suspended and it's throwing them away instead of rejecting them or
> Does stuffing a couple sync calls somewhere before it starts
> suspending devices (wherever that is, I don't know) make the problems
> go away?
No -- I've had a sync call in my suspend script for years. More precisely, at
the moment it's
sync; sleep 1
to let things flush. No joy.
Of course, rejecting them wouldn't seem to do any good; what's needed, I
suspect, is for the device to queue them (as usual) but not fire up the disk
when in suspending mode.
--Steve Bellovin, http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~smb
Main Index |
Thread Index |