From owner-freebsd-current  Mon Oct 20 11:37:57 1997
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id LAA11840
          for current-outgoing; Mon, 20 Oct 1997 11:37:57 -0700 (PDT)
          (envelope-from owner-freebsd-current)
Received: from dyson.iquest.net (dyson.iquest.net [198.70.144.127])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA11830
          for <current@FreeBSD.ORG>; Mon, 20 Oct 1997 11:37:50 -0700 (PDT)
          (envelope-from toor@dyson.iquest.net)
Received: (from root@localhost)
	by dyson.iquest.net (8.8.7/8.8.5) id NAA11707;
	Mon, 20 Oct 1997 13:37:27 -0500 (EST)
From: "John S. Dyson" <toor@dyson.iquest.net>
Message-Id: <199710201837.NAA11707@dyson.iquest.net>
Subject: Re: nullfs & current
In-Reply-To: <19971020193540.39453@keltia.freenix.fr> from Ollivier Robert at "Oct 20, 97 07:35:40 pm"
To: roberto@keltia.freenix.fr (Ollivier Robert)
Date: Mon, 20 Oct 1997 13:37:27 -0500 (EST)
Cc: current@FreeBSD.ORG
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL31 (25)]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

Ollivier Robert said:
> According to Poul-Henning Kamp:
> > calling vnode_pager_uncache() null_remove() would be wrong, the file
> > may still be open.
> 
> Right.
>  
Not quite.

I was wrong there, but the underlying object that is pointed to BOTH the
nullfs layer and the underlying error should have it's reference count
decreased.  If the reference count of the object is ONE, and the VNODE
is referred to only by that object, then the vnode_pager_uncache should
be done. 

Please don't break coherency!!!

-- 
John
dyson@freebsd.org
jdyson@nc.com