Date: Mon, 3 Jan 2000 20:51:43 +0100 From: Guido van Rooij <guido@gvr.org> To: Peter Wemm <peter@netplex.com.au> Cc: Hidetoshi Shimokawa <simokawa@sat.t.u-tokyo.ac.jp>, vsilyaev@mindspring.com, dillon@freebsd.org, freebsd-emulation@FreeBSD.ORG, dbutter@wireless.net Subject: Re: VMware: Questions... Message-ID: <20000103205143.A44784@gvr.gvr.org> In-Reply-To: <20000103192903.AEF531CA0@overcee.netplex.com.au>; from Peter Wemm on Tue, Jan 04, 2000 at 03:29:03AM %2B0800 References: <guido@gvr.org> <20000103192903.AEF531CA0@overcee.netplex.com.au>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Jan 04, 2000 at 03:29:03AM +0800, Peter Wemm wrote: > > Heh, yours is simpler than mine. I was attempting a more generic solution > that marked a vnode as unlinked in the filesystems and the syncer then took > special care to avoid msyncing them. Mine would have caught the case where > a file was mmaped first then unlinked and kept open. If the syncer could Which is better then mine. > do anything special with unlinked plain files, it would then have the > information to deal with them too. (It doesn't, so that part is academic). > FFS already discards dirty blocks on last close if the file is already > unlinked. > I just committed my patch. If you think yours is better, feel free to back mine out. -Guido To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-emulation" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20000103205143.A44784>