[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]
Re: kern/46955 (process deadlock (tstile) runing amanda sendsize - rename bug in tmpfs ???)
The following reply was made to PR kern/46955; it has been noted by GNATS.
From: David Holland <dholland%netbsd.org@localhost>
To: Wolfgang Stukenbrock <wolfgang.stukenbrock%nagler-company.com@localhost>
Subject: Re: kern/46955 (process deadlock (tstile) runing amanda sendsize -
rename bug in tmpfs ???)
Date: Sun, 27 Apr 2014 21:11:45 +0000
On Sun, Apr 27, 2014 at 10:37:06AM +0200, Wolfgang Stukenbrock wrote:
> I've had a try with tmpfs changes into 5.x, and it seems to fix most
> issues, but accedently not all - I've had one dead lock in tmpfs again some
> time ago.
There may be other issues. There were a bunch of stability fixes to
tmpfs last fall; I thought many of them had gotten into 6.x but I'm
told not. (rmind@ says he doesn't have time but can help out...)
However, none of them AFAIK have been merged into 5.x, so there are a
bunch of things that could have bitten you.
> Due to my limited time and the massive changes in the fs-code and the way
> process notifications takes place between 5.x and 6.x, I've stopped working
> on it and started migration of all of our systems to 6.x. (Currently
> suspended due to the dead-lock-problem described in PR 48733.)
That seems reasonable. We are hoping to get 7.x branched any month
now; it's definitely getting to the point where working on 5.x isn't
all that worthwhile.
> My ufs patch to 5.x seems to be stable (of cause, it is ugly ...), but I
> think I've already send that one long time ago.
David A. Holland
Main Index |
Thread Index |