kind of pseudofs-based filesystem. Fixes (at least) one problem where
when procfs is mounted mupltiple times, trying to unmount one will often
cause the wrong one to get unmounted, and other problem where mounting
one procfs on top of another caused the kernel to lock up.
Reviewed by: des
that use it. Specifically, vop_stdlock uses the lock pointed to by
vp->v_vnlock. By default, getnewvnode sets up vp->v_vnlock to
reference vp->v_lock. Filesystems that wish to use the default
do not need to allocate a lock at the front of their node structure
(as some still did) or do a lockinit. They can simply start using
vn_lock/VOP_UNLOCK. Filesystems that wish to manage their own locks,
but still use the vop_stdlock functions (such as nullfs) can simply
replace vp->v_vnlock with a pointer to the lock that they wish to
have used for the vnode. Such filesystems are responsible for
setting the vp->v_vnlock back to the default in their vop_reclaim
routine (e.g., vp->v_vnlock = &vp->v_lock).
In theory, this set of changes cleans up the existing filesystem
lock interface and should have no function change to the existing
locking scheme.
Sponsored by: DARPA & NAI Labs.
v_tag is now const char * and should only be used for debugging.
Additionally:
1. All users of VT_NTS now check vfsconf->vf_type VFCF_NETWORK
2. The user of VT_PROCFS now checks for the new flag VV_PROCDEP, which
is propagated by pseudofs to all child vnodes if the fs sets PFS_PROCDEP.
Suggested by: phk
Reviewed by: bde, rwatson (earlier version)
- v_vflag is protected by the vnode lock and is used when synchronization
with VOP calls is needed.
- v_iflag is protected by interlock and is used for dealing with vnode
management issues. These flags include X/O LOCK, FREE, DOOMED, etc.
- All accesses to v_iflag and v_vflag have either been locked or marked with
mp_fixme's.
- Many ASSERT_VOP_LOCKED calls have been added where the locking was not
clear.
- Many functions in vfs_subr.c were restructured to provide for stronger
locking.
Idea stolen from: BSD/OS
- Initialize lock structure in vncache_alloc
- Return locked vnodes from vncache_alloc
- Setup vnode op vectors to use default lock, unlock, and islocked
- Implement simple locking scheme required for lookup
most cases NULL is passed, but in some cases such as network driver locks
(which use the MTX_NETWORK_LOCK macro) and UMA zone locks, a name is used.
Tested on: i386, alpha, sparc64
the wrong VOP descriptor. This misuse caused VFS-cached vnodes to be
re-cached, resulting in the leak. This commit is an interim fix until DES
has a chance to rework the code involved.
- Add a third callback to the pfs_node structure. This one simply returns
non-zero if the specified requesting process is allowed to access the
specified node for the specified target process. This is used in
addition to the usual permission checks, e.g. when certain files don't
make sense for certain (system) processes.
- Make sure that pfs_lookup() and pfs_readdir() don't yap about files
which aren't pfs_visible(). Also check pfs_visible() before performing
reads and writes, to prevent the kind of races reported in SA-00:77 and
SA-01:55 (fork a child, open /proc/child/ctl, have that child fork a
setuid binary, and assume control of it).
- Add some more trace points.
Note ALL MODULES MUST BE RECOMPILED
make the kernel aware that there are smaller units of scheduling than the
process. (but only allow one thread per process at this time).
This is functionally equivalent to teh previousl -current except
that there is a thread associated with each process.
Sorry john! (your next MFC will be a doosie!)
Reviewed by: peter@freebsd.org, dillon@freebsd.org
X-MFC after: ha ha ha ha
It's not finished yet (I still have to find a way to implement process-
dependent nodes without consuming too much memory, and the permission
system needs tightening up), but it's becoming hard to work on without
a repo (I've accidentally almost nuked it once already), and it works
(except for the lack of process-dependent nodes, that is).
I was supposed to commit this a week ago, but timed out waiting for jkh
to reply to some questions I had. Pass him a spoonful of bad karma :)
