From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Message-ID: <dde22050be348f51eede30e0a8a4b76f@quanstro.net>
From: erik quanstrom <quanstro@quanstro.net>
Date: Sun, 21 Jun 2009 10:11:23 -0400
To: 9fans@9fans.net
In-Reply-To: <5adefdf7dd429504c13b95bb3dbeab5a@hamnavoe.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [9fans] fossil/venti falling down?
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 0d767498-ead5-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

On Sun Jun 21 07:59:52 EDT 2009, 9fans@hamnavoe.com wrote:
> > Forgot to add that I've only seen one error on the console during all of this:
> > /boot/fossil: could not write super block; waiting 10 seconds
> > /boot/fossil: blistAlloc: called on clean block.
>
> I get a few of these nearly every day.  I've been assuming they are benign.

this error sets off alarms for me.  the comment in the
code is "BUG", and naively, i can't work out
a) why the author added that comment,
b) what superWrite would be competing with for
a lock on the superblock (blockWrite returns 0 if
it !vtCanLock from _cacheLocalLookup), and
c) why superWrite isn't doing a vtLock rather than
a vtCanLock, and
d) what happens if b is stll dirty (as per comment)
and a crash occurs.

can someone explain why these are all okay?

- erik