Slight change of vnode<-->vm object relationship.

[Peter Edwards]

On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 00:08:35 +0100, Poul-Henning Kamp
<phk at phk.freebsd.dk> wrote:
> In message <34cb7c84050111145415980aa2 at mail.gmail.com>, Peter Edwards writes:
> 
> >How about mmap() mappings after the close()? These can persist post
> >VOP_CLOSE, can't they?
> 
> I belive they hold a reference to the vnode so that it is in fact
> not really closed after all, it just looks that way from userland.
> 
As Stephan pointed out, that's looked after by VOP_INACTIVE, which
doesn't pair quite as smoothly with VOP_OPEN.

Also, the VOP_OPEN/VOP_CLOSE doesn't seem to bracket for exec() either
(there's a call to VOP_OPEN, but I can't find the matching VOP_CLOSE.
That could be just a bug, or myopia on my part)