Date: Wed, 18 Aug 1999 11:01:58 -0700 (PDT) From: Julian Elischer <julian@whistle.com> To: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@critter.freebsd.dk> Cc: Bill Studenmund <wrstuden@nas.nasa.gov>, Terry Lambert <tlambert@primenet.com>, Alton Matthew <Matthew.Alton@anheuser-busch.com>, Hackers@FreeBSD.ORG, fs@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: BSD XFS Port & BSD VFS Rewrite Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.95.990818105716.12306A-100000@current1.whistle.com> In-Reply-To: <830.934961572@critter.freebsd.dk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 18 Aug 1999, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: > Matt doesn't represent the FreeBSD project, and even if he rewrites > the VFS subsystem so he can understand it, his rewrite would face > considerable resistance on its way into FreeBSD. I don't think > there is reason to rewrite it, but there certainly are areas > that need fixing. You are misinformed as far as I know.. From discussions I saw, th main architect of a VFS rewrite would be Kirk, and Matt would be acting as Kirk's right-hand-man. > > >> The use of the "vfs_default" to make unimplemented VOP's > >> fall through to code which implements function, while well > >> intentioned, is misguided. > > I beg to differ. The only difference is that we pass through > multiple layers before we hit the bottom of the stack. There is > no loss of functionality but significant gain of clarity and > modularity. Well I believe that Kirk considers them misguided too, but he stated that he wasn't going to remove them without serious thought about the alternatives. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.3.95.990818105716.12306A-100000>