Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2001 11:20:49 +0100 From: "Koster, K.J." <K.J.Koster@kpn.com> To: 'Matt Dillon' <dillon@earth.backplane.com> Cc: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: RE: vm balance Message-ID: <59063B5B4D98D311BC0D0001FA7E452205FD9B53@l04.research.kpn.com>
index | next in thread | raw e-mail
Dear Matt,
> :
> :Well, if that's the case, yank all uses of v_id from the nfs code,
> :I'll do the namecache and vnodes can be deleted to the joy
> of our users...
> :
>
> If you can yank v_id out from the kern/vfs_cache code, I
> will make similar
> fixes to the NFS code. I am not particularly interesting
> in returning
> vnodes to the MALLOC pool myself, but I am interested in
> fixing the
> two bugs I noticed when I ran over the code earlier today.
>
> Actually one bug. The vput() turns out to be correct, I
> just looked at
> the code again. However, the cache_lookup() call in
> nfs_vnops.c is
> broken. Assuming no other fixes, the vpid load needs to
> occur before
> the VOP_ACCESS call rather then after.
>
I'm just curious: would this be the "redundant call/non-optimal
performance"--type bug or the "panics or trashes the system in dark and
mysterious ways"--type bug? If it is the latter, do you think it may be an
opportunity for you to close some NFS-related PR's?
Kees Jan
================================================
You are only young once,
but you can stay immature all your life.
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
help
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?59063B5B4D98D311BC0D0001FA7E452205FD9B53>