Re: kern/46955 (process deadlock (tstile) runing amanda sendsize - rename bug in tmpfs ???)

[Wolfgang Stukenbrock <wolfgang.stukenbrock%nagler-company.com@localhost>]

The following reply was made to PR kern/46955; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: Wolfgang Stukenbrock <wolfgang.stukenbrock%nagler-company.com@localhost>
To: gnats-bugs%NetBSD.org@localhost
Cc: kern-bug-people%netbsd.org@localhost, netbsd-bugs%netbsd.org@localhost, 
gnats-admin%netbsd.org@localhost,
        dholland%NetBSD.org@localhost
Subject: Re: kern/46955 (process deadlock (tstile) runing amanda sendsize - 
rename bug in tmpfs ???)
Date: Sun, 27 Apr 2014 10:37:06 +0200

 Thank you,
 
 I've had a try with tmpfs changes into 5.x, and it seems to fix most 
 issues, but accedently not all - I've had one dead lock in tmpfs again 
 some time ago.
 Due to my limited time and the massive changes in the fs-code and the 
 way process notifications takes place between 5.x and 6.x, I've stopped 
 working on it and started migration of all of our systems to 6.x. 
 (Currently suspended due to the dead-lock-problem described in PR 48733.)
 My ufs patch to 5.x seems to be stable (of cause, it is ugly ...), but I 
 think I've already send that one long time ago.
 
 best regards
 
 W. Stukenbrock
 
 dholland%NetBSD.org@localhost wrote:
 
 > Synopsis: process deadlock (tstile) runing amanda sendsize - rename bug in 
 > tmpfs ???
 > 
 > State-Changed-From-To: feedback->open
 > State-Changed-By: dholland%NetBSD.org@localhost
 > State-Changed-When: Sat, 26 Apr 2014 05:46:03 +0000
 > State-Changed-Why:
 > I think rmind was suggesting you should finish your patches to merge the
 > fix into -5 :-)
 > but I'll set it so it stops nagging you.
 > 
 > 
 > 
 >