Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2008 13:37:30 +0200 From: Kostik Belousov <kostikbel@gmail.com> To: Ed Schouten <ed@fxq.nl> Cc: Attilio Rao <attilio@freebsd.org>, Marcel Moolenaar <marcelm@juniper.net>, current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Old LOR between devfs & devfsmount resurfacing? Message-ID: <20080207113730.GA57756@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua> In-Reply-To: <20080207111703.GA94844@hoeg.nl> References: <B269B28B-C66E-4AC6-A4D9-FBA378466F89@juniper.net> <20080207045015.GW57756@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua> <3bbf2fe10802070216idd5206ey7a66c0873311e66c@mail.gmail.com> <20080207104354.GY57756@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua> <3bbf2fe10802070304r29cb8d2u1210fe285c917424@mail.gmail.com> <20080207110901.GZ57756@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua> <20080207111703.GA94844@hoeg.nl>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--dxRvWdH66PF/KkOc Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, Feb 07, 2008 at 12:17:03PM +0100, Ed Schouten wrote: > * Kostik Belousov <kostikbel@gmail.com> wrote: > > This LOR shall not be ignored globally. When real, it caused the easily > > reproducable lockup of the machine. > >=20 > > It would be better to introduce some lockmgr flag to ignore _this_ lock= ing. >=20 > Wouldn't it be easier to just fix the LOR itself, or are we dealing with > some kind of chicken-and-egg situation? This seems to be not easy, because mount point shall be protected while we allocate the new vnode in getnewvnode() etc. --dxRvWdH66PF/KkOc Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (FreeBSD) iEYEARECAAYFAkeq7XoACgkQC3+MBN1Mb4jgSwCgurQYBc3n0n1riiebk/FdNIda eKIAoJ7Axkl9NB0hFP6/dLP/0q8PmqHJ =ZQ96 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --dxRvWdH66PF/KkOc--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20080207113730.GA57756>