From owner-freebsd-fs Mon May 25 20:08:25 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id UAA05342 for freebsd-fs-outgoing; Mon, 25 May 1998 20:08:25 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from parkplace.cet.co.jp (parkplace.cet.co.jp [202.32.64.1]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id UAA05335 for ; Mon, 25 May 1998 20:08:22 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from michaelh@cet.co.jp) Received: from localhost (michaelh@localhost) by parkplace.cet.co.jp (8.8.8/CET-v2.2) with SMTP id DAA13526; Tue, 26 May 1998 03:05:57 GMT Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 12:05:57 +0900 (JST) From: Michael Hancock To: Eivind Eklund cc: "John S. Dyson" , tlambert@primenet.com, fs@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: May 17th UP machine 'panic' In-Reply-To: <19980526035319.63753@follo.net> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Tue, 26 May 1998, Eivind Eklund wrote: > (moved to fs@freebsd.org) > > On Mon, May 25, 1998 at 05:36:36PM -0500, John S. Dyson wrote: > [... on vput...] > > It is a very good idea to explicitly pass down curproc. I am still working > > on SMP issues, and I believe that it will be a good investment. > > OK, let us just for the sake of argument say that I've got a rough > patch (3 hours of work) and have put it on > http://www.freebsd.org/~eivind/vput-proc.patch > > Where would I go from here? How do I test this without burning my > filesystems? Have anybody got any testsuites they believe to be > relevant? I wish we had more testsuites, I've been using make world, testvn, and lmbench. I wrote testvn to track reference counting. See ~mch. You probably won't burn your filesystems, you might get panics. You should review and test as much as you can on your own and demonstrate some stability before you release it for broader testing. > Oh, and can somebody tell me if cnp->cn_proc is generally usable as a > 'relevant process pointer', or if I should keep it to areas where it > is already used (as I did in the rough patch)? You will often see ... struct proc *p = cnp->cn_proc; ... if the argument is used frequently in the function. It's usually relevant, but being consistent is probably fine. I won't have time to review it for a while. I need to finish vop_rename, which is a doozy, and things have gotten busy at work. Regards, Mike To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message