From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Oct 11 02:42:32 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A43D16A4C8 for ; Wed, 11 Oct 2006 02:42:32 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from janm@transactionware.com) Received: from mail.transactionware.com (mail.transactionware.com [203.14.245.7]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 1674043D5A for ; Wed, 11 Oct 2006 02:41:58 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from janm@transactionware.com) Received: (qmail 9574 invoked from network); 11 Oct 2006 02:42:12 -0000 Received: from new.transactionware.com (192.168.1.55) by dm.transactionware.com with SMTP; 11 Oct 2006 02:42:12 -0000 Received: (qmail 10705 invoked by uid 1026); 11 Oct 2006 02:42:11 -0000 Received: from 192.168.1.51 by new.transactionware.com (envelope-from , uid 1003) with qmail-scanner-1.25 (spamassassin: 3.0.2. Clear:RC:1(192.168.1.51):. Processed in 3.221908 secs); 11 Oct 2006 02:42:11 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO janmxp) (192.168.1.51) by new.transactionware.com with SMTP; 11 Oct 2006 02:42:07 -0000 Message-ID: <004d01c6ecde$db9ca990$3301a8c0@janmxp> From: "Jan Mikkelsen" To: "Daichi GOTO" , "Danny Braniss" References: <44B67340.1080405@freebsd.org> <44B74036.6060101@freebsd.org><20060903170129.GA98917@xor.obsecurity.org><20060903172033.GA99212@xor.obsecurity.org><20060904184717.GA41475@xor.obsecurity.org><44FD8B2B.60501@freebsd.org> <452B750D.2020104@freebsd.org> Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2006 12:42:13 +1000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=response Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.3790.2663 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.3790.2757 Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org, freebsd-current@freebsd.org, Kris Kennaway Subject: Re: [ANN] unionfs patchset-16 release, it is ready for the merge 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: Wed, 11 Oct 2006 02:42:32 -0000 Daichi GOTO wrote: > Danny Braniss wrote: >> [...] >>> Yeah, we have a new patchset to solve above problem I think. >> >> any chance that the new unionfs will make it to 6.2? > > We cannot merger unionfs patch to 6.x branch. It'll just only for > -current. For 6.x patchset is just a patchset. Getting it to 6-STABLE at some point would be very nice; what is currently there is unusable. I have been using your patch successfully and I certainly don't see any regressions. The man pages make it clear that the subsystem will be subject to change. >> I'm using it, and it's working just fine - as opposed to the unusable >> one supplied. > > For under some heavy situation with mount_nullfs, it has a problem since > the lock mechanism. To solve that problem, we need a new API(function) > for VFS. We are discussing about it and need vfs-hackers help. > Sorry for my slow response :( Even so, your patch works better than what is there. >> If not, Daichi GOTO, will you have a new set of patches? union_vfsops.c >> just changed, for example. >> thanks, >> danny > > uhmm... you need a new patchset if it is under construction? The patch at http://people.freebsd.org/~daichi/unionfs/unionfs6-p16.diff no longer applies cleanly to 6-STABLE. Where you have replaced complete files, it might be worth just providing the new file. Thank you for your work on this; I find it very useful. Regards, Jan Mikkelsen