From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG  Sun Jul 18 17:04:56 2004
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C8DF16A4CF
	for <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>;
	Sun, 18 Jul 2004 17:04:56 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from smtp.cegetel.net (mf01.sitadelle.com [212.94.174.78])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A8CB43D48
	for <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>;
	Sun, 18 Jul 2004 17:04:55 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from tataz@sitadelle.com)
Received: from droopy.tech.sitadelle.com (unknown [213.223.184.201])
	by smtp.cegetel.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 79091379B3
	for <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>;
	Sun, 18 Jul 2004 19:04:53 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by droopy.tech.sitadelle.com (Postfix, from userid 1000)
	id 9EBC9FC321; Fri, 16 Jul 2004 16:00:48 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Fri, 16 Jul 2004 16:00:48 +0200
From: Jeremie Le Hen <jeremie.le-hen@epita.fr>
To: Mark Linimon <linimon@lonesome.com>
Message-ID: <20040716140048.GF9548@sitadelle.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.5.1+cvs20040105i
cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Call for PRs: nullfs
X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current
	<freebsd-current.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 18 Jul 2004 17:04:56 -0000

>   kern/51583 (confirmed still a problem in -STABLE, -CURRENT)

I tried the attached patch, and it's appear to be only a half-fix.
To test it, I made a small server which listens on a named Unix socket
and a client sending an hello message through it.  Here are the results
on a 5-CURRENT (about 50 days ago) (`lower' means the program opens the
socket on the lower filesystem while `upper' means it is on the null
layer) :

			Without patch		With Dmitry
						Sivachenko's patch

client(lower) /		OK			OK
server(lower)

client(upper) /		Failed			OK
server(lower)

client(lower) /		Failed			Failed
server(upper)

client(upper) /		OK			OK
server(upper)


I hope this can help.  I tried to understand why it fails, but my
programming skills are not good enough.

Regards,
-- 
Jeremie LE HEN aka TtZ/TataZ                          jeremie.le-hen@epita.fr
                                                                 ttz@epita.fr
Hi! I'm a .signature virus! Copy me into your ~/.signature to help me spread!