From owner-cvs-all Mon Oct 11 3:40:23 1999 Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org Received: from overcee.netplex.com.au (overcee.netplex.com.au [202.12.86.7]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 53EE014E62; Mon, 11 Oct 1999 03:40:07 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from peter@netplex.com.au) Received: from netplex.com.au (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by overcee.netplex.com.au (Postfix) with ESMTP id AE4631CC8; Mon, 11 Oct 1999 18:40:06 +0800 (WST) (envelope-from peter@netplex.com.au) X-Mailer: exmh version 2.0.2 2/24/98 To: Matthew Dillon Cc: Poul-Henning Kamp , "Daniel C. Sobral" , cvs-committers@FreeBSD.ORG, cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/vm vm_swap.c In-reply-to: Your message of "Mon, 11 Oct 1999 00:09:58 MST." <199910110709.AAA20043@apollo.backplane.com> Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 18:40:06 +0800 From: Peter Wemm Message-Id: <19991011104006.AE4631CC8@overcee.netplex.com.au> Sender: owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk Matthew Dillon wrote: > :> > :> We're not removing the device interface. It provides a reasonable > :> abstraction and a nice demark between swap_pager.c and vm_swap.c, > :> as well as potential flexibility that could be useful in the future > :> Removing it will not save time or much in the way of code space. > : > :The swap *device* is non-functional and doesn't *do* anything except > :provide a subroutine call in a very roundabout way. I think it would be > :far better to avoid an indirection via the VOP_* system for no useful gain > :and do something like the aooended patch (which works perfectly here BTW, > :even under heavy swap load on multiple disks). Further (micro) > :optimizations are possible, for example pbgetvp() is used to get a p-buffer > :that's associated with swapdev_vp and the device. The device isn't used > :and presently vn_todev(vp) ends up returning NODEV. swapdev_vp is kinda > :orphaned with this change but still works ok. p-buffers are created being > > Gentlemen. You might as well stop. I've said it before and I > will say it again: Nobody is screwing around with the swap > subsytem. I spent a lot of time on that subsytem, including weeks > of testing. I am essentially the maintainer for it, and I am not > going to allow people to mess with it based on a few hacks. Just > because the swap subsystem uses a small subset of the device > interface doesn't mean you can hack it up to remove it. You are not > 'fixing' anything by doing so. You aren't making the system more reliabl e, > you aren't making the system run better. You are just making my job > harder by forcing me to retest everything. So it isn't going to happen. Oh come on now! Your "testing" didn't even find that reading /dev/drum was an instant guaranteed system panic. This patch does not change a thing except remove dead code that is almost certain to break shortly. Cheers, -Peter To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message