Hi, Since upgrading to 4.10-ish (cvsup), nullfs (mount_null) causes my jailing host to panic and reboot very frequently. I've been using nullfs for about a year now, up until and including 4.9 and beyond, and I have never had problems with it. It has been heavily used, among other things to mount the host ports tree into all jails (10+), etc. Anyone got any idea what's happening? Someone mentioned on -CURRENT that nullfs has been the victim of some pretty hefty bitrot lately, so perhaps that's the reason? In any case - in its current form it does not belong anywhere near a -STABLE release. Wbr, /Eirik
On Mon, Jun 21, 2004 at 11:05:07PM +0200, Eirik Oeverby wrote:> Hi, > > Since upgrading to 4.10-ish (cvsup), nullfs (mount_null) causes my > jailing host to panic and reboot very frequently. I've been using nullfs > for about a year now, up until and including 4.9 and beyond, and I have > never had problems with it. It has been heavily used, among other things > to mount the host ports tree into all jails (10+), etc. > > Anyone got any idea what's happening? Someone mentioned on -CURRENT that > nullfs has been the victim of some pretty hefty bitrot lately, so > perhaps that's the reason? In any case - in its current form it does not > belong anywhere near a -STABLE release.Which is precisely what the manpage tells you. Kris -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 187 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-stable/attachments/20040621/291f265a/attachment.bin
On Mon, 21 Jun 2004, Eirik Oeverby wrote:> Hi, > > Since upgrading to 4.10-ish (cvsup), nullfs (mount_null) causes my jailing > host to panic and reboot very frequently. I've been using nullfs for about a > year now, up until and including 4.9 and beyond, and I have never had > problems with it. It has been heavily used, among other things to mount the > host ports tree into all jails (10+), etc. > > Anyone got any idea what's happening? Someone mentioned on -CURRENT that > nullfs has been the victim of some pretty hefty bitrot lately, so perhaps > that's the reason? In any case - in its current form it does not belong > anywhere near a -STABLE release.nullfs never has been particularly stable, as the man page indicates ... I drop'd using it awhile ago, in favor of using nfs, because of teh problems taht I was gettin g.. that said, if its a consistent panic/reboot, can you get a core dump from it? ---- Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org) Email: scrappy@hub.org Yahoo!: yscrappy ICQ: 7615664
On Mon, Jun 21, 2004 at 11:05:07PM +0200, Eirik Oeverby wrote:> Hi, > > Since upgrading to 4.10-ish (cvsup), nullfs (mount_null) causes my > jailing host to panic and reboot very frequently. I've been using nullfs > for about a year now, up until and including 4.9 and beyond, and I have > never had problems with it. It has been heavily used, among other things > to mount the host ports tree into all jails (10+), etc.You have not included enough information; you should at least include a panic message and either say what you were doing at the time it crashed or steps to reproduce the problem when reporting bugs.> > Anyone got any idea what's happening? Someone mentioned on -CURRENT that > nullfs has been the victim of some pretty hefty bitrot lately, so > perhaps that's the reason?nullfs is in better shape in -CURRENT than it is in -STABLE.> In any case - in its current form it does not > belong anywhere near a -STABLE release.Please re-read the manual page, paying particular attention to the statement that the file system is not supported. Tim
Hello, first of all: THIS FILESYSTEM TYPE IS NOT YET FULLY SUPPORTED (READ: IT DOESN'T WORK) AND USING IT MAY, IN FACT, DESTROY DATA ON YOUR SYSTEM. USE AT YOUR OWN RISK. BEWARE OF DOG. SLIPPERY WHEN WET. My experience: I had much less problems with unionfs -b, even with FreeBSD 4.10, to mount for example /usr/ports into a jail temporarily. But for everything else you should never use it. Bjoern
> From: owner-freebsd-stable@freebsd.org[mailto:owner-freebsd-stable@freebsd.org]On Behalf Of Pawel Malachowski> On Tue, Jun 22, 2004 at 04:46:01PM -0300, Marc G. Fournier wrote: > > Many *are* using it in 4 quite effectively ... those that tout it asbeing> > 'broken' all the time are those that are either trying to do something > > that is known to cause problems (ie. FIFOs) > > I guess it is hard to do this with nullfs mounted ro (like kern/63662).Yes, and tjr@ also had compiled some nullfs fixes some time ago which didn't yet get committed: http://people.freebsd.org/~tjr/nullfs-4.diff. Tim said he would want to "check some things first" but probably got distracted. Helge
> From: owner-freebsd-stable@freebsd.org > [mailto:owner-freebsd-stable@freebsd.org]On Behalf Of Bjoern Koenig > > NFS on localhost instead of nullfs is a very > good solution.Err, no, the overhead is *much* higher than plain nullfs or unionfs. Local NFS is essentially fiddling file system access through the networking subsystem. Helge
Hi, On Mon, Jun 21, 2004 at 11:05:07PM +0200, Eirik Oeverby wrote:> Since upgrading to 4.10-ish (cvsup), nullfs (mount_null) causes my > jailing host to panic and reboot very frequently. I've been using nullfs > for about a year now, up until and including 4.9 and beyond, and I have > never had problems with it. It has been heavily used, among other things > to mount the host ports tree into all jails (10+), etc. > > Anyone got any idea what's happening? Someone mentioned on -CURRENT that > nullfs has been the victim of some pretty hefty bitrot lately, so > perhaps that's the reason? In any case - in its current form it does not > belong anywhere near a -STABLE release.Did you look at http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=kern/63662 and the patch that it mentions, http://people.freebsd.org/~tjr/nullfs-4.diff? Cheers, -- Anders.