From owner-freebsd-current Mon Dec 31 3:14:47 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from relay.butya.kz (butya-gw.butya.kz [212.19.129.142]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BEFA837B42A; Mon, 31 Dec 2001 03:14:43 -0800 (PST) Received: by relay.butya.kz (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 08168287A3; Mon, 31 Dec 2001 17:14:37 +0600 (ALMT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by relay.butya.kz (Postfix) with ESMTP id C131E2879E; Mon, 31 Dec 2001 17:14:37 +0600 (ALMT) Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2001 17:14:37 +0600 (ALMT) From: Boris Popov To: Matthew Dillon Cc: Sheldon Hearn , Michal Mertl , current@FreeBSD.ORG, bmilekic@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: ntfs and sendfile problem (corrupted data) In-Reply-To: <200112302019.fBUKJpZ16855@apollo.backplane.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Sun, 30 Dec 2001, Matthew Dillon wrote: > Well, we have a problem here. smbfs is allowing VOBJBUF to be set > on its vnodes. This creates a backing VM object that smbfs never > uses and makes sendfile() believe that it can do UIO_NOCOPY uio's on > smbfs vnodes. Yes, smbfs pretend to support backing VM object (as nwfs do). However, this support has never been complete but nwfs definitely worked in this specific situation and I'm unsure when smbfs and, probably nwfs, wasn't updated for new VM rules to correctly support mmap'ed reads. IMO, dropping support for mmap() isn't a good idea because there is a plenty of programs which didn't work if mmap() calls is not supported (and most of those programs use mmap() for read operations). -- Boris Popov http://rbp.euro.ru To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message