From owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Mar 1 19:16:09 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 96F6116A4CE; Tue, 1 Mar 2005 19:16:09 +0000 (GMT) Received: from pooker.samsco.org (pooker.samsco.org [168.103.85.57]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C747943D4C; Tue, 1 Mar 2005 19:16:06 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from scottl@samsco.org) Received: from [192.168.254.19] (ibook-nai.samsco.home [192.168.254.19]) (authenticated bits=0) by pooker.samsco.org (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id j21JHwvU001176; Tue, 1 Mar 2005 12:18:12 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from scottl@samsco.org) Message-ID: <4224BF67.1070300@samsco.org> Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2005 12:15:51 -0700 From: Scott Long User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X Mach-O; en-US; rv:1.7.5) Gecko/20041217 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ceri Davies References: <20050228233939.GB81082@elvis.mu.org> <53871.1109636277@critter.freebsd.dk> <20050301093736.GH81082@elvis.mu.org> <20050301105230.GL3322@submonkey.net> In-Reply-To: <20050301105230.GL3322@submonkey.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.8 required=3.8 tests=ALL_TRUSTED autolearn=failed version=3.0.2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.2 (2004-11-16) on pooker.samsco.org cc: src-committers@FreeBSD.org cc: John Baldwin cc: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org cc: Alfred Perlstein cc: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org cc: Poul-Henning Kamp Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/fs/hpfs hpfs_vnops.c src/sys/fs/msdosfs msdosfs_denode.csrc/sys/gnu/ext2fssrc/sys/sys vnode.h ... X-BeenThere: cvs-all@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: CVS commit messages for the entire tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2005 19:16:09 -0000 Ceri Davies wrote: > On Tue, Mar 01, 2005 at 01:37:36AM -0800, Alfred Perlstein wrote: > >>* Poul-Henning Kamp [050228 16:18] wrote: >> >>>The ABI is already broken for filesystem modules as far as I >>>know, but if I'm wrong we can revert it. >> >>I'm not sure you're right but either way progress is good, and 5.x >>needs the work. >> >>How about we play nice after 5.4 or even 5.5 when 5 has more widespread >>adoption? > > > We already told everyone that we wouldn't break for 5.4. > > Ceri All that's been talked about so far with RE with regards to 5.4 is the merging of the fdesk locking, which I believe is complete now. No mention has been made of VFS locking. If there are plans to do that, we need to talk about them right away. Scott