From owner-freebsd-arch Thu Mar 28 19:16:27 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from green.bikeshed.org (freefall.FreeBSD.org [216.136.204.21]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC1AF37B41F; Thu, 28 Mar 2002 19:16:12 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (green@localhost) by green.bikeshed.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g2T3GBL06732; Thu, 28 Mar 2002 22:16:11 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from green@green.bikeshed.org) Message-Id: <200203290316.g2T3GBL06732@green.bikeshed.org> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.5 07/13/2001 with nmh-1.0.4 To: Terry Lambert Cc: Garance A Drosihn , Kirk McKusick , arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: vnode::v_op bugfix / PERFORCE change 8574 for review (fwd) In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 28 Mar 2002 17:55:56 PST." <3CA3C9AC.D5280D16@mindspring.com> From: "Brian F. Feldman" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Thu, 28 Mar 2002 22:16:11 -0500 Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Terry Lambert wrote: > "Brian F. Feldman" wrote: > > Garance A Drosihn wrote: > > > A previous message said new vnode-ops are very rare. I > > > do not know what would trigger them, but I will note that > > > one of the things I can brag about with freebsd is that > > > I have a freebsd machine running a production service > > > here which has now been up for 437 consecutive days. Are > > > these events rare enough that I would never have to worry > > > about ending an uptime-streak because of too many of them? > > > > It's not likely to happen, I imagine, but I'd rather to make it "impossible" > > to happen rather than just not likely. > > You can make it happen by loading a module that is not statically > compiled, and which adds a VOP to the list of VOPs. The one that > triggered this whole thread was NTFS, which adds a VOP for no > good reason that I can discern (it should be a file ioctl, IMO). > > The workaround is to statically compile the module so that the > VOP list doesn't get added to when you mount an NTFS volume. > > The operation is rare, in that it can only happen when you > load a module that adds a VOP. Doing _that_ is rare. I should have clarified; I meant I want that panic() Garance is referring to to be nonexistant, not that I never want a VFS module to be able to define a new vnode operation. -- Brian Fundakowski Feldman \'[ FreeBSD ]''''''''''\ <> green@FreeBSD.org <> bfeldman@tislabs.com \ The Power to Serve! \ Opinions expressed are my own. \,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message