From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Sep 6 07:11:53 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8932616A419 for ; Thu, 6 Sep 2007 07:11:53 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from lulf@stud.ntnu.no) Received: from royk.itea.ntnu.no (royk.itea.ntnu.no [129.241.190.230]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4677D13C428 for ; Thu, 6 Sep 2007 07:11:53 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from lulf@stud.ntnu.no) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by royk.itea.ntnu.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1618166FDB; Thu, 6 Sep 2007 09:11:41 +0200 (CEST) Received: from twoflower.idi.ntnu.no (twoflower.idi.ntnu.no [129.241.104.169]) by royk.itea.ntnu.no (Postfix) with ESMTP; Thu, 6 Sep 2007 09:11:40 +0200 (CEST) Received: by twoflower.idi.ntnu.no (Postfix, from userid 1002) id D669317148; Thu, 6 Sep 2007 09:11:13 +0200 (CEST) Date: Thu, 6 Sep 2007 09:11:13 +0200 From: Ulf Lilleengen To: Eric Anderson Message-ID: <20070906071113.GA77993@twoflower.idi.ntnu.no> References: <20070816100526.GA31897@stud.ntnu.no> <46DF60A6.8040403@freebsd.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <46DF60A6.8040403@freebsd.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.15 (2007-04-06) X-Content-Scanned: with sophos and spamassassin at mailgw.ntnu.no. Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] Make fdescfs MPSAFE X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 06 Sep 2007 07:11:53 -0000 On ons, sep 05, 2007 at 09:06:30pm -0500, Eric Anderson wrote: > Ulf Lilleengen wrote: > > Hi, > > To be able to better understand VFS and locking in general, I started > > making > > fdescfs MPSAFE. I'm not experienced with any of these things, so there > > might be > > some errors, although I've looked through much VFS code and code for other > > FS > > like nullfs. I've tested it by running two pthreads on the same fd, and > > that seamt > > to work, but there might be other cases where it will fail. > > Patch is attached. > > > I guess this never went anywhere? Looked like good work to me, but I didn't > test it much. Did anyone see any issues with the patches? > I got some comments from kib@. They have been adressed, and I've looked over it a few more times, but people are a bit busy right now with testing CURRENT :) I'm awaiting a review from someone when they have time. -- Ulf Lilleengen