Date: Tue, 04 Jan 2000 04:22:21 +0800 From: Peter Wemm <peter@netplex.com.au> To: Matthew Dillon <dillon@apollo.backplane.com> Cc: Guido van Rooij <guido@gvr.org>, Hidetoshi Shimokawa <simokawa@sat.t.u-tokyo.ac.jp>, vsilyaev@mindspring.com, dillon@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-emulation@FreeBSD.ORG, dbutter@wireless.net Subject: Re: VMware: Questions... Message-ID: <20000103202221.CD4A51CCE@overcee.netplex.com.au> In-Reply-To: Message from Matthew Dillon <dillon@apollo.backplane.com> of "Mon, 03 Jan 2000 11:59:54 PST." <200001031959.LAA08461@apollo.backplane.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Matthew Dillon wrote:
> :> that marked a vnode as unlinked in the filesystems and the syncer then too
k
> :> special care to avoid msyncing them. Mine would have caught the case wher
e
> :> a file was mmaped first then unlinked and kept open. If the syncer could
> :
> :Which is better then mine.
> :...
>
> Well, yes and no. I'd rather not get *too* fancy because, if this
> catches on, programs will start using the new flag anyway and we will
> be left with a lot of cruft in the kernel source that nobody uses any
> more.
I tend to agree. I went looking for hammers that I knew about - ie:
catching the last-unlink events. Having said that, I do like the "after
the event" option though... ie: rm'ing an in-use mmap'ed file stops it
being msynced by syncer. It's quite simple to do and doesn't add much at
all. However, it's not worth doing it this way when it has a footprint all
the way down into the filesystems when there's a much easier way of fixing
the problem at hand (vmware).
Cheers,
-Peter
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-emulation" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20000103202221.CD4A51CCE>