[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]
Re: [PATCH] Re: zero-filed page on VOP_PUTPAGES
> YAMAMOTO Takashi <yamt%mwd.biglobe.ne.jp@localhost> wrote:
>> i don't think it fixes the problem as VOPs can release the lock
>> before the completion of async PUFFS_VN_SETATTR.
> It just prevents puffs_vnop_getattr to call uvm_vnp_setattr with a stall
> value between the time dosetattr sends PUFFS_VN_SETATTR and the time it
> calls uvm_vnp_setattr. This is enough to work around the issue if the
> file server does not reorder requests.
but file servers can reorder requests, can't they?
>> besides that, non-diagnostic uses of VOP_ISLOCKED are mostly considered bugs.
> The problem is that VOP_GETATTR does not specify whether the vnode
> should be locked or not. Some callers lock and others do not, therefore
> the test.
besides that it's strongly discouraged way (i'd call it bug) to use locks,
the test seems broken when called with LK_SHARED held.
> Emmanuel Dreyfus
Main Index |
Thread Index |