[haiku-development] Re: publish_vnode / get_vnode
- From: Brecht Machiels <brecht@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: haiku-development@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Tue, 09 Jun 2009 00:23:35 +0000
Brecht Machiels wrote:
Ingo Weinhold wrote:
Any ideas? Of course, st_blocks has to be filled in, so something is
definitely wrong here...
Haiku's struct stat has changed recently. You're not by any chance
using some unhealthy mix of old userlandfs and newer headers or vice
versa? At least BFS compiled for userland seems to work well with the
current version, so I'd assume userlandfs is working correctly.
I'd already thought of that (yay). Unfortunately, what's causing the
problems is even more stupid. The UFS kernel addon and server were still
linked to my release builds (from April 12)!
Now that I can take advantage of userlandfs debug logging, I see that
get_vnode gets called after all, at least in the userlandfs kernel addon:
KERN: userlandfs [11446223096: 64901] userlandfs_open_dir(0x810be0cc,
0x8a324d20)
KERN: userlandfs [11446230356: 64901] userlandfs_open_dir() done: (0,
0x1805fa28)
KERN: userlandfs [11446240414: 64901] userlandfs_read_dir(0x810be0cc,
0x8a324d20, 0x1805fa28, 0x1802f7b0, 4088, 65535)
KERN: userlandfs [11446250974: 64901] Volume::ReadDir(): buffer
returned: 4088 bytes
KERN: userlandfs [11446263210: 64901] userlandfs_read_dir() done: (0, 1)
KERN: userlandfs [11446269085: 64901] entry: d_dev: 12, d_pdev: 0,
d_ino: 1, d_pino: 0, d_reclen: 29, d_name: `libs'
KERN: userlandfs [11446279054: 64901] userlandfs_get_vnode(0x810be0cc,
1, 0x00000000, 0)
KERN: userlandfs [11446286425: 64901] userlandfs_get_vnode() done:
(80000005, 0x00000001, 0x1802f7ca, 0x8c7a3d82)
KERN: userlandfs [11446295888: 64901] userlandfs_close_dir(0x810be0cc,
0x8a324d20, 0x1805fa28)
KERN: userlandfs [11446310436: 64901] userlandfs_close_dir() done: 0
Following the path from UFS kernel addon to UFS server, I see that the
end-point is:
// ReadVNode
status_t
Volume::ReadVNode(ino_t vnid, bool reenter, void** node, int* type,
uint32* flags, FSVNodeCapabilities* _capabilities)
{
return B_BAD_VALUE;
}
Which would explain the "Invalid argument" (0x80000005) error ls
returns. I'm not sure why the same doesn't happen with BFS for you.
Perhaps BFS does publish each node. I'll check with userland BFS
tomorrow if I find the time.
Regards,
Brecht
Other related posts:
