Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2007 22:41:58 +0000 From: Josef Karthauser <joe@FreeBSD.org> To: Kostik Belousov <kostikbel@gmail.com> Cc: Jeremie Le Hen <jeremie@le-hen.org>, hackers@freebsd.org, Robert Watson <rwatson@freebsd.org>, fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: nullfs and named pipes. Message-ID: <20070218224158.GA1297@genius.tao.org.uk> In-Reply-To: <20070216143656.GM39168@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua> References: <20070204023711.GA3393@genius.tao.org.uk> <20070215135750.GR64768@obiwan.tataz.chchile.org> <20070215152259.GA2950@genius.tao.org.uk> <20070215153135.GI39168@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua> <20070216125007.D38234@fledge.watson.org> <20070216143656.GM39168@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--rwEMma7ioTxnRzrJ Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri, Feb 16, 2007 at 04:36:56PM +0200, Kostik Belousov wrote: > > >> cvs diff: Diffing . > > >> Index: null_subr.c > > >> =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D > > >> RCS file: /home/ncvs/src/sys/fs/nullfs/null_subr.c,v > > >> retrieving revision 1.48.2.1 > > >> diff -u -r1.48.2.1 null_subr.c > > >> --- null_subr.c 13 Mar 2006 03:05:17 -0000 1.48.2.1 > > >> +++ null_subr.c 14 Feb 2007 00:02:28 -0000 > > >> @@ -235,6 +235,8 @@ > > >> xp->null_vnode =3D vp; > > >> xp->null_lowervp =3D lowervp; > > >> vp->v_type =3D lowervp->v_type; > > >> + if (vp->v_type =3D=3D VSOCK || vp->v_type =3D=3D VFIFO) > > >> + vp->v_un =3D lowervp->v_un; > > > > > >I'm wondering is some reference counting needed there ? > >=20 > > Yes, I find this a bit worrying also, but I don't know enough about how= =20 > > nullfs works to reason about it. What happens when a vnode in the bott= om=20 > > layer has its on-disk reference count drop to zero -- is the vnode in t= he=20 > > top layer invalidated somehow? >=20 > Vnode reclamation from lower layer cannot do anithing for corresponding n= ullfs > vnode, but that vnode has reference from nullfs vnode. > On the other hand, can forced unmount proceed for lower layer ? Does know of any reason why I can't commit this as it is, at least for now. It doesn't appear that it would break anything that works currently, and in its current form it at least fixes named pipe functionality for the kinds of cases that people would want to use it. Joe --rwEMma7ioTxnRzrJ Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.4 (FreeBSD) iEYEARECAAYFAkXY1jUACgkQXVIcjOaxUBZ65gCfbG6iHjnQ+UfbJ2y5ElcWtoUY IRsAnRsXqalOHF9kOhR/IjOtwcgudwzB =xWNT -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --rwEMma7ioTxnRzrJ--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20070218224158.GA1297>