Re: Induced crashes

2002-12-20 Thread Alfred M. Szmidt
> A full report of filesystem lossage is going to be a bit image of a > filesystem which has failed, at the least, and ideally, a description > of what operations were in progress at the time it failed. > > You could get the latter in the Hurd by running the failing cases > under

Re: Induced crashes

2002-12-20 Thread Philip Charles
On 18 Dec 2002, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote: > A full report of filesystem lossage is going to be a bit image of a > filesystem which has failed, at the least, and ideally, a description > of what operations were in progress at the time it failed. > > You could get the latter in the Hurd by running

Re: Induced crashes

2002-12-16 Thread Thomas Bushnell, BSG
Philip Charles <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > The typescript of an fsck. A mild corruption. A full scale corruption > means that the floppy cannot be mounted or the network setup. The > typescript itself is rather scrambled. You mention a floppy. Are you popping the floppy out in mid-write? Th

Re: Induced crashes

2002-12-16 Thread Philip Charles
On Mon, 16 Dec 2002, Alfred M. Szmidt wrote: >File-system trashed a number of times and this seemed to be associated >with a mounted cdrom. One trashing forced a reboot. Unfortunately the >typescript file was lost in the following e2fsck. > > Could you be more specific how it trashed

Re: Induced crashes

2002-12-16 Thread Thomas Bushnell, BSG
Marcus Brinkmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Mon, Dec 16, 2002 at 08:32:18PM -0500, Neal H. Walfield wrote: > > > Disk hardware guarantees that a sector write can always be completed > > > even if the power goes out partway through. That means that writing a > > > single sector *is* always a

Re: Induced crashes

2002-12-16 Thread Thomas Bushnell, BSG
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Neal H. Walfield) writes: > > Disk hardware guarantees that a sector write can always be completed > > even if the power goes out partway through. That means that writing a > > single sector *is* always atomic. > > The size of a single sector does not necessarily equal the siz

Re: Induced crashes

2002-12-16 Thread Marcus Brinkmann
On Mon, Dec 16, 2002 at 08:32:18PM -0500, Neal H. Walfield wrote: > > Disk hardware guarantees that a sector write can always be completed > > even if the power goes out partway through. That means that writing a > > single sector *is* always atomic. > > The size of a single sector does not neces

Re: Induced crashes

2002-12-16 Thread Neal H. Walfield
> Disk hardware guarantees that a sector write can always be completed > even if the power goes out partway through. That means that writing a > single sector *is* always atomic. The size of a single sector does not necessarily equal the size of of a disk block.

Re: Induced crashes

2002-12-16 Thread Thomas Bushnell, BSG
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Neal H. Walfield) writes: > > ext2fs should be quite robust: Even pulling the plug at any time should not > > corrupt the filesystem beyond what e2fsck can repair. > > Let us assume that ext2fs writes a block of metadata to disk. In the > kernel, in the middle of the DMA opera

Re: Induced crashes

2002-12-16 Thread Neal H. Walfield
> ext2fs should be quite robust: Even pulling the plug at any time should not > corrupt the filesystem beyond what e2fsck can repair. Let us assume that ext2fs writes a block of metadata to disk. In the kernel, in the middle of the DMA operation, the kernel panics. There is no guarantee that e2f

Re: Induced crashes

2002-12-16 Thread Michal 'hramrach' Suchanek
On Mon, Dec 16, 2002 at 04:50:10PM +0100, Marcus Brinkmann wrote: > ext2fs should be quite robust: Even pulling the plug at any time should not > corrupt the filesystem beyond what e2fsck can repair. In my experience it is almost that robust. When I'm trying to build things the system repeatedly c

Re: Induced crashes

2002-12-16 Thread Marcus Brinkmann
On Mon, Dec 16, 2002 at 09:44:06AM -0500, Neal H. Walfield wrote: > > OK folk, what is causing the problem? > > This is not an ext2fs bug; something is causing a Mach panic. The > reason that your file system has been corrupted is that the data was > not synch'ed to disk (when Mach panics, it tak

Re: Induced crashes

2002-12-16 Thread Neal H. Walfield
> OK folk, what is causing the problem? This is not an ext2fs bug; something is causing a Mach panic. The reason that your file system has been corrupted is that the data was not synch'ed to disk (when Mach panics, it takes the whole system down). The correct solution is to fix Mach. Determinin

Re: Induced crashes

2002-12-16 Thread Alfred M. Szmidt
File-system trashed a number of times and this seemed to be associated with a mounted cdrom. One trashing forced a reboot. Unfortunately the typescript file was lost in the following e2fsck. Could you be more specific how it trashed the filesystem? Output from e2fsck would be a good st

Induced crashes

2002-12-16 Thread Philip Charles
File-system trashed a number of times and this seemed to be associated with a mounted cdrom. One trashing forced a reboot. Unfortunately the typescript file was lost in the following e2fsck. >From memory, -something- panic zalloc: zone threads exhausted. After installing the packages from the