On Friday 07 March 2008, David Chinner wrote:
quoted text
> On Thu, Mar 06, 2008 at 11:29:07PM -0500, Chris Knadle wrote:
> > During the final unmount before reboot there was an assertion failure
> > from XFS=20
=2E..
quoted text
> > When replying please CC me, as I am not currently subscribed to the lis=
t.
=2E..
quoted text
> > Assertion failed: atomic_read(&mp->m_active_trans) =3D=3D 0, file:
> > fs/xfs/xfs_vfsops.c, line: 708

   Thank you for taking the time to look and reply to this.

quoted text
> Known problem. Race in the VFS w.r.t. read-only remounts:
>
> http://marc.info/?l=3Dlinux-kernel&m=3D120106649923499&w=3D2

   At the bottom of the above message there's a patch which is not currentl=
y=20
merged in either the linux-2.6.24.y.git or linux-2.6.git trees.  That's=20
perhaps as it should be, but I would like to know if it's worth trying=20
merging the patch locally as an attempted workaround until such time as=20
2.6.25 is released and stable.

quoted text
> The fix for the problem lies outside XFS:
>
> http://marc.info/?l=3Dlinux-kernel&m=3D120109304227035&w=3D2

   If I understand the above correctly, it sounds like the per-vfsmount is=
=20
going to be a new feature committed to 2.6.25, but probably not backported =
to=20
prior kernel trees.  If this feature was was added at 2.6.23.9 then if I=20
understand corectly it's only an issue between that version and 2.6.25; is=
=20
that correct?

   Thanks again.
   Cheers.

   -- Chris

=2D-=20

Chris Knadle
Chris.Knadle@coredump.us