From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list xfs); Thu, 07 Dec 2006 15:10:08 -0800 (PST) Received: from evaldomino.Falconstor.com (mail1.falconstor.com [216.223.47.230]) by oss.sgi.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/SuSE Linux 0.7) with ESMTP id kB7NA0aG010906 for ; Thu, 7 Dec 2006 15:10:01 -0800 Message-ID: <45789ED4.5000203@falconstor.com> Date: Thu, 07 Dec 2006 18:08:04 -0500 From: "Geir A. Myrestrand" Reply-To: geir.myrestrand@falconstor.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: New CentOS4/RHEL4-compatible xfs module rpms References: <4560AB84.9060200@sandeen.net> <45784E71.4080605@falconstor.com> <457854CB.5030507@sandeen.net> <45787ED4.5070801@falconstor.com> <1165525906.30459.25.camel@edge> <45788927.4030207@falconstor.com> <1165527628.30459.31.camel@edge> <45788CD1.9010509@falconstor.com> <1165529205.30459.36.camel@edge> <457892BB.1000203@falconstor.com> <45789341.6000809@sandeen.net> <457894DF.70603@falconstor.com> <457895FA.9010203@sandeen.net> <45789B27.1050507@falconstor.com> <45789B83.5010800@sandeen.net> In-Reply-To: <45789B83.5010800@sandeen.net> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Sender: xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com Errors-to: xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com List-Id: xfs To: xfs@oss.sgi.com Cc: Eric Sandeen , nscott@aconex.com Eric Sandeen wrote: > > You don't have multiple concurrent freezes happening do you.... > > -Eric > Nope, I don't need to. Now it happens on the first call to xfs_freeze. Sometimes in the past I did freeze, unfreeze, and then freeze before it happened, but this was still serialized from the same terminal window. Oh, could strace be the reason as to why it now always happens on the first invocation of the freeze command? Maybe it affects the wait calls... Well, without strace it would probably just happen on the second invocation of freeze (after unfreeze) like it did on RHELAS4U2... My test case is very simple, the only thing special is that I simplified my test case so much that I end up using a file as my disk (setup as a loopback device). However, the problem was initially discovered using a real disk, so I don't think that is the problem. If you're interested I can forward the test case involving probably less than 10 commands and a simple Perl script of maybe 20 lines. -- Geir A. Myrestrand