From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Apr 12 22:59:45 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: arch@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D289E106566B for ; Sat, 12 Apr 2008 22:59:45 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bright@elvis.mu.org) Received: from elvis.mu.org (elvis.mu.org [192.203.228.196]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AED058FC0C for ; Sat, 12 Apr 2008 22:59:45 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bright@elvis.mu.org) Received: by elvis.mu.org (Postfix, from userid 1192) id A75E81A4D7E; Sat, 12 Apr 2008 15:59:45 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 12 Apr 2008 15:59:45 -0700 From: Alfred Perlstein To: Sam Leffler Message-ID: <20080412225945.GY95731@elvis.mu.org> References: <200804121703.m3CH3StJ081660@chez.mckusick.com> <41ED3941-E5E6-45F0-B880-C1B2861FDE32@rabson.org> <48011074.9060906@freebsd.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <48011074.9060906@freebsd.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i Cc: Kirk McKusick , arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: VOP_LEASE X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 12 Apr 2008 22:59:45 -0000 * Sam Leffler [080412 12:41] wrote: > Doug Rabson wrote: > > > >On 12 Apr 2008, at 18:03, Kirk McKusick wrote: > > > >>>Date: Sat, 12 Apr 2008 02:13:15 -1000 (HST) > >>>From: Jeff Roberson > >>>To: arch@freebsd.org > >>>Subject: VOP_LEASE > >>> > >>>As far as I can tell this has never been used. Unless someone can > >>>show me > >>>otherwise I'm going to go ahead and remove it. > >>> > >>>Thanks, > >>>Jeff > >> > >>VOP_LEASE is used by NQNFS and NFSv4. It notifies them when a file > >>is modified locally so that they know to update any outstanding > >>leases (e.g., evict any write lease for the file and do callbacks > >>for any read leases for the file). Deleting VOP_LEASE would break > >>NFS big time. > > > >I think our NQNFS support might have been removed some time ago - I > >can't see any calls to VOP_LEASE in the code right now. Something like > >VOP_LEASE would certainly be useful for a hypothetical future NFSv4 > >server. I believe that samba could use it too for its oplocks feature > >which appears to be similar to NQNFS's leases and NFSv4's delegations. > > > > Note NQNFS is long dead (netbsd removed it also not too long > ago--together with VOP_LEASE). Jeff doesn't say why he wants to remove > it but it might be best removed only to return when there's a real > consumer of the api. We have people on the verge of implementing NFSv4, in fact we have a half-done client right now. I don't think it makes sense to remove it as I have stated before. -Alfred