From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG  Sun Sep  1 14:42:05 2013
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org
 [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2318A375
 for <freebsd-fs@freebsd.org>; Sun,  1 Sep 2013 14:42:05 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from rmacklem@uoguelph.ca)
Received: from esa-jnhn.mail.uoguelph.ca (esa-jnhn.mail.uoguelph.ca
 [131.104.91.44]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D4AA32FE8
 for <freebsd-fs@freebsd.org>; Sun,  1 Sep 2013 14:42:04 +0000 (UTC)
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AqAEAFNRI1KDaFve/2dsb2JhbABaDoN/gye9RYE0dIIkAQEEASNWBRYYAgINGQJZBogPBqd2kWqBKY4iNAeCaYE0A6lbgmFbIIFu
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.89,1001,1367985600"; d="scan'208";a="48843693"
Received: from muskoka.cs.uoguelph.ca (HELO zcs3.mail.uoguelph.ca)
 ([131.104.91.222])
 by esa-jnhn.mail.uoguelph.ca with ESMTP; 01 Sep 2013 10:41:57 -0400
Received: from zcs3.mail.uoguelph.ca (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
 by zcs3.mail.uoguelph.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA67DB3F15;
 Sun,  1 Sep 2013 10:41:57 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Sun, 1 Sep 2013 10:41:57 -0400 (EDT)
From: Rick Macklem <rmacklem@uoguelph.ca>
To: Benjamin Kaduk <kaduk@MIT.EDU>
Message-ID: <1247162688.16775666.1378046517881.JavaMail.root@uoguelph.ca>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.GSO.1.10.1308312130220.16692@multics.mit.edu>
Subject: Re: fixing "umount -f" for the NFS client
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Originating-IP: [172.17.91.203]
X-Mailer: Zimbra 7.2.1_GA_2790 (ZimbraWebClient - FF3.0 (Win)/7.2.1_GA_2790)
Cc: freebsd-fs <freebsd-fs@freebsd.org>
X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14
Precedence: list
List-Id: Filesystems <freebsd-fs.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-fs>,
 <mailto:freebsd-fs-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-fs>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-fs@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-fs-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-fs>,
 <mailto:freebsd-fs-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 01 Sep 2013 14:42:05 -0000

Benjamin Kaduk wrote:
> On Fri, 30 Aug 2013, Rick Macklem wrote:
> 
> > Kostik wrote:
> >> On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 07:43:34PM -0400, Rick Macklem wrote:
> >>>>> I assume I would also need to bump __FreeBSD_version (and maybe
> >>>>> VFS_VERSION?).
> >>>> I think you could avoid it.
> >>>>
> >>> Do you mean I don't need to bump __FreeBSD_version or VFS_VERSION
> >>> or both?
> >> I do not see much sense in bumping either of them.
> >> You might want to bump __FreeBSD_version when merging to stable.
> 
> Please do bump __FreeBSD_version when merging to stable.  I will not
> make
> much noise about -current at the moment, as I'm behind on tracking
> it.
> 
Actually, I'm "on the fence" as to whether or not this one should be
MFC'd, due to the VFS ABI breakage.

Since you (well, actually OpenAFS;-) are the main guy affected by VFS
ABI breakage these days, maybe you'd like to comment on this?

Also, if anyone else has an opinion w.r.t. MFC'ng a patch that adds
a VFS op and, therefore, breaks the VFS ABI, please feel free to comment.

Thanks, rick
ps: And, yes, I will bump __FreeBSD_version of I end up doing the MFC.

> Thanks,
> 
> Ben
>