From owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG  Thu Nov 10 10:30:38 2005
Return-Path: <owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG>
X-Original-To: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org
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 D990016A41F;
	Thu, 10 Nov 2005 10:30:38 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from phk@critter.freebsd.dk)
Received: from phk.freebsd.dk (phk.freebsd.dk [130.225.244.222])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6AD8A43D48;
	Thu, 10 Nov 2005 10:30:38 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from phk@critter.freebsd.dk)
Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (unknown [192.168.48.2])
	by phk.freebsd.dk (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F9E3BC66;
	Thu, 10 Nov 2005 10:30:34 +0000 (UTC)
To: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au>
From: "Poul-Henning Kamp" <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 10 Nov 2005 21:12:05 +1100."
	<20051110202946.Q2041@epsplex.bde.org> 
Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2005 11:30:34 +0100
Message-ID: <4576.1131618634@critter.freebsd.dk>
Sender: phk@critter.freebsd.dk
Cc: Doug White <dwhite@FreeBSD.org>, cvs-src@FreeBSD.org,
	src-committers@FreeBSD.org, Doug White <dwhite@gumbysoft.com>,
	cvs-all@FreeBSD.org
Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/kern vfs_subr.c src/sys/fs/devfs
	devfs_vnops.c 
X-BeenThere: cvs-all@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: CVS commit messages for the entire tree <cvs-all.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-all>,
	<mailto:cvs-all-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/cvs-all>
List-Post: <mailto:cvs-all@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:cvs-all-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-all>,
	<mailto:cvs-all-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2005 10:30:39 -0000

In message <20051110202946.Q2041@epsplex.bde.org>, Bruce Evans writes:

>>>> The reason it is not in dirent is that UFS/FFS uses dirent as the
>>>> layout in directories as a microoptimization.
>>>
>>> I think the reason is exactly the opposite.
>>
>> Care to elaborate ?
>
>I think ffs is older than the current `struct dirent', and the latter
>was copied from ffs's `struct direct', not vice versa.

Yes, we're in agreement then.

My point was that cookies were not added to dirent because of the
UFS/FFS relationship.

-- 
Poul-Henning Kamp       | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
phk@FreeBSD.ORG         | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer       | BSD since 4.3-tahoe    
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.