[OpenIndiana-discuss] kernel panic when opening file viewer to check files on an NTFS file system

[Jean-Pierre André]

Toomas Soome via openindiana-discuss wrote on 12/15/24 2:58 PM:
> 
> 
>> On 15. Dec 2024, at 15:43, Jean-Pierre André via openindiana-discuss <openindiana-discuss at openindiana.org> wrote:
>>
>> Marcel Telka wrote on 12/15/24 1:51 PM:
>>> On Sun, Dec 15, 2024 at 11:57:22AM +0100, Jean-Pierre André via openindiana-discuss wrote:
>>>> I however see that /usr/kernel/fs/amd64/pcfs and
>>>> /usr/kernel/fs/amd64/fdfs which also have to index into
>>>> the vfssw table still do so assuming this is an array of
>>>> 128 bytes records. I do not know which package provides
>>>> these files.
>>> $ pkg search /usr/kernel/fs/amd64/pcfs
>>> INDEX      ACTION VALUE                    PACKAGE
>>> path       file   usr/kernel/fs/amd64/pcfs pkg:/SUNWcs at 0.5.11-2024.0.0.22463
>>> $ pkg search /usr/kernel/fs/amd64/fdfs
>>> INDEX      ACTION VALUE                    PACKAGE
>>> path       file   usr/kernel/fs/amd64/fdfs pkg:/SUNWcs at 0.5.11-2024.0.0.22463
>>> $
>>> HTH
>>
>> Sorry, I am lost.
>>
>> The newly updated fuse module still index vfssw by steps of 128.
>> When I compile it myself, this is by steps of 136.
>>
>> I had better think it over again.
>>
>> Jean-Pierre
> 
> root at beastie:/code/illumos-gate# mdb -k
> Loading modules: [ unix genunix specfs dtrace mac cpu.generic uppc apix scsi_vhci zfs sata sd cpc ip hook neti sockfs arp usba i915 xhci s1394 stmf stmf_sbd mm lofs idm crypto random nfs klmmod fcip fctl vmm ufs logindmux ptm smbsrv sppp ]
>> ::sizeof vfs
> vfs_feature_t
> vfs_impl_t
> vfs_t
> vfs_ufsfx_t
> vfsdef_t
> vfsdef_v5
> vfsops_t
> vfssw_t
>> ::sizeof vfssw_t
> sizeof (vfssw_t) = 0x88
>>
> 
> Thats 136 bytes. This check is done on current HEAD of illumos-gate.
> 
> rgds,
> toomas
> _______________________________________________
> openindiana-discuss mailing list
> openindiana-discuss at openindiana.org
> https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
> 

Hi Toomas,

Thank you for the checking. In fact 136 is computed as
(16 + 1)*8, and I overlooked the "+ 1". Sorry for the
confusion.

And AFAICT everything is right after the update.

Jean-Pierre