Subject: Re: LFS status?
To: Konrad Schroder <perseant@hhhh.org>
From: Bill Studenmund <wrstuden@netbsd.org>
List: current-users
Date: 05/03/2006 13:40:06
--n2Pv11Ogg/Ox8ay5
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Tue, May 02, 2006 at 03:45:33PM -0700, Konrad Schroder wrote:
> On Tue, 2 May 2006, Geert Hendrickx wrote:
>=20
>=20
> The deadlocks are being addressed as they come up; the most irritating on=
e=20
> at present is that I implemented the "release the snapshot" mechanism as =
a=20
> fcntl, and fcntl locks a vnode which might be locked by the cleaner while=
=20
> it waits for the "release the snapshot" signal.  What I really want is a=
=20
> generic fsctl(2) that doesn't deal with a vnode at all...but I digress.

It probably wouldn't hurt to make VOP_FCNTL take an unlocked vnode.

Take care,

Bill

--n2Pv11Ogg/Ox8ay5
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (NetBSD)

iD8DBQFEWRUmWz+3JHUci9cRAjqzAJ98lz+zPklns9tuuzFOWx59ynE4KwCfWoVr
h9DFtIJKFJntzQ233/YcCUY=
=bLFL
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--n2Pv11Ogg/Ox8ay5--