On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 09:31:09AM -0700, David O'Brien wrote:
> Does anyone object to this patch?
>
> David Wolfskill and I have run TMPFS on a number of machines for two
> years with no problems.
>
> I may have missed something, but I'm not aware of any serious PRs on
> TMPFS either.
>
>
> Index: tmpfs_vfsops.c
> ===================================================================
> --- tmpfs_vfsops.c (revision 221113)
> +++ tmpfs_vfsops.c (working copy)
> @@ -155,9 +155,6 @@ tmpfs_mount(struct mount *mp)
> return EOPNOTSUPP;
> }
>
> - printf("WARNING: TMPFS is considered to be a highly experimental "
> - "feature in FreeBSD.\n");
> -
> vn_lock(mp->mnt_vnodecovered, LK_SHARED | LK_RETRY);
> error = VOP_GETATTR(mp->mnt_vnodecovered, &va, mp->mnt_cred);
> VOP_UNLOCK(mp->mnt_vnodecovered, 0);The things I am aware of: - there is a races on the lookup. They were papered over in r212305, but the bug was not really fixed, AFAIR. - the tmpfs does double-buffering for the mapped vnodes. This is quite insulting for the memory-backed fs, isn't it ? I have a patch, but it is still under review. - I believe Peter Holm has more test cases that fails with tmpfs. He would have more details. I somewhat remember some panic on execve(2) the binary located on tmpfs. Removing the warning will not make the issues coming away.
pgpJs4JMIlpaE.pgp
Description: PGP signature
