From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Michael Conrad Subject: Re: Bug? Kernel doesn't prevent multiple rw nilfs mounts Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2013 16:01:15 -0400 Message-ID: <52697C8B.3090407@intellitree.com> References: <52695704.3010507@intellitree.com> <76524A8B-8063-4335-9B26-615417123CDE@dubeyko.com> <52696F86.70203@intellitree.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-nilfs-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed" To: Vyacheslav Dubeyko Cc: linux-nilfs-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org On 10/24/2013 3:57 PM, Vyacheslav Dubeyko wrote: > What do you mean when you are talking about two systems? > Do you have two systems are working in parallel with one NILFS2 partition? > What is your configuration? Separate systems. Each has 2 SATA disks (a main drive, and a second for backups). These are test/development servers I use, and running regular consumer hardware. I added a second drive to each just to experiment with NILFS. (BTW, I had problems when running NILFS on a loopback device on System 1. I can investigate that further later.) I tried NILFS on System 1 a few days ago, and ran into the problem. I decided to try a newer kernel, but tried from scratch on System 2 instead of upgrading System 1. The only thing they have in common is that they are gentoo-based and 32-bit. They have very different hardware and very different kernel configs. The double-mount should be prevented at the kernel level, right? I could try a linux version direct from kernel.org, next. If the double-mount should be prevented in user-space, then I could check things like the libc, compiler, strace, etc. Which would you like next? -Mike -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nilfs" in the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html