Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 02:31:04 +0000 From: Ian Dowse <iedowse@maths.tcd.ie> To: Jeff Roberson <jroberson@chesapeake.net> Cc: pete@isilon.com Subject: Re: Cleaning up vgone. Message-ID: <200503110231.aa37257@salmon.maths.tcd.ie> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 10 Mar 2005 06:21:04 EST." <20050310061419.Y20708@mail.chesapeake.net>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
In message <20050310061419.Y20708@mail.chesapeake.net>, Jeff Roberson writes: [Good info about shared lock filesystems and VI_DOOMED snipped] >I'd much rather get rid of DOINGINACT and simply vhold the vnode so it >doesn't have a 0 ref count. It seems more natural to me to use a >reference than special case another flag. I like the idea of the patch >below, but it conflicts with the patch I just posted as I removed the >DOINGINACT check from VSHOULDFREE. Yes, I'm all for a cleaner way of doing this too. Many of the reasons for DOINGINACT will become unnecessary with your changes anyway, such as the code in nfs_inactive() that used to have to worry about the vnode going away while it did the sillyrename I/O. The only advantage I can think of for using a special flag instead of holding a reference in vgone() is the following: if code called by vgone() has a bug and drops one too many references, then the negative reference count will be caught sooner. It's worth at least making sure that we get a clean panic in this case since recursion caused by the reference count hitting zero twice can lead to messy panics that are difficult to debug. Ianhome | help
Want to link to this message? Use this
URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200503110231.aa37257>