From owner-freebsd-fs Mon Apr 6 19:55:22 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id TAA04955 for freebsd-fs-outgoing; Mon, 6 Apr 1998 19:55:22 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from parkplace.cet.co.jp (parkplace.cet.co.jp [202.32.64.1]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id TAA04913; Mon, 6 Apr 1998 19:55:17 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from michaelh@cet.co.jp) Received: from localhost (michaelh@localhost) by parkplace.cet.co.jp (8.8.8/CET-v2.2) with SMTP id CAA00801; Tue, 7 Apr 1998 02:54:28 GMT Date: Tue, 7 Apr 1998 11:54:28 +0900 (JST) From: Michael Hancock To: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG, tech-kern@netbsd.org, tech@openbsd.org, freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: VFS vrele fixes In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Mon, 6 Apr 1998, I wrote: > http://www.freebsd.org/~mch/vfs1.html If you reply publically, please trim the headers to the relevant mailing lists but keep me included because I'm not a member of all of them. Ok, I've gotten some positive comments on this. Here's a summary: 1) It's a nicer framework to experiment with alternative central vnode management systems such as per-CPU vnode pools. We can keep the existing standard implementation for UP, but distribute hot spots in an SMP version. 2) AFS people with source licenses like it because we can work around third party implementations that refuse to retain OS patches. 3) I should do locking state sooner. I'll get to it and the web page includes an implementation of vn_put() which will be used in the generic layer. Regards, Mike Hancock To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message