Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 17 Apr 1998 14:23:40 +0900 (JST)
From:      Michael Hancock <michaelh@cet.co.jp>
To:        freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG
Cc:        freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: Updated vfs patches
Message-ID:  <Pine.SV4.3.95.980417141611.17404A-100000@parkplace.cet.co.jp>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.SV4.3.95.980417133824.17216A-100000@parkplace.cet.co.jp>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, 17 Apr 1998, Michael Hancock wrote:

> http://www.freebsd.org/~mch/vop1a.diff
> 
> 1) In the original code, ext2_rmdir and msdosfs_rmdir release the lock
> across the truncate call but ufs_rmdir doesn't.  The ufs_rmdir
> implementation make it clean for me because I just delete the vput(), but
> in ext2_rmdir and msdosfs_rmdir I must reacquire the lock so the generic
> layer can do the vput() (phew!).  I'm not sure if we should be holding a
> lock across truncate and I have yet to review the logs yet to see why.
> Perhaps someone can shed some light on this.

I found it (POST_SOFTUPDATES)!  Do we not block when calling truncate with
softupdates on?


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.SV4.3.95.980417141611.17404A-100000>