[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Major XFS problems...

To: Jakob Oestergaard <jakob@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Nathan Scott <nathans@xxxxxxx>, linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Major XFS problems...
From: Chris Wedgwood <cw@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 9 Sep 2004 11:09:03 -0700
In-reply-to: <20040909121100.GN390@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <20040908123524.GZ390@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20040909074046.A3958243@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20040908232210.GL390@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20040909094255.F3951028@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20040909121100.GN390@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: linux-xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
On Thu, Sep 09, 2004 at 02:11:00PM +0200, Jakob Oestergaard wrote:

> A google for 'debug.c:106' turns out some 120 results - it seems that no
> special magic is needed, other than a few boxes to set up the test
> scenario.


    84  void
    85  cmn_err(register int level, char *fmt, ...)
    86  {
   105          if (level == CE_PANIC)
   106                  BUG();
   107  }

Using cmn_err with CE_PANIC will show up as this, so it's likely your
google search is showing multiple different bugs, many of which have
been fixed.  You need to check the stack traces to see if they are the


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>