Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 00:08:35 +0100 From: "Poul-Henning Kamp" <phk@phk.freebsd.dk> To: Peter Edwards <peadar.edwards@gmail.com> Cc: arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Slight change of vnode<-->vm object relationship. Message-ID: <25164.1105484915@critter.freebsd.dk> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 11 Jan 2005 22:54:45 GMT." <34cb7c84050111145415980aa2@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message <34cb7c84050111145415980aa2@mail.gmail.com>, Peter Edwards writes: >How about mmap() mappings after the close()? These can persist post >VOP_CLOSE, can't they? I belive they hold a reference to the vnode so that it is in fact not really closed after all, it just looks that way from userland. If that wasn't the case, then we would be leaking diskspace all over the place if people did: create file fill with data mmap unlink file close file -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 phk@FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?25164.1105484915>