From owner-freebsd-fs  Thu Nov 25 16:13: 3 1999
Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org
Received: from sv01.cet.co.jp (sv01.cet.co.jp [210.171.56.2])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 4F9ED14D37; Thu, 25 Nov 1999 16:12:59 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from michaelh@cet.co.jp)
Received: from localhost (michaelh@localhost)
	by sv01.cet.co.jp (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id AAA03313;
	Fri, 26 Nov 1999 00:12:57 GMT
Date: Fri, 26 Nov 1999 09:12:57 +0900 (JST)
From: Michael Hancock <michaelh@cet.co.jp>
To: Eivind Eklund <eivind@FreeBSD.ORG>
Cc: Terry Lambert <tlambert@primenet.com>, fs@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: namei() and freeing componentnames
In-Reply-To: <19991125182159.B602@bitbox.follo.net>
Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.95LJ1.1b3.991126091024.3272A-100000@sv01.cet.co.jp>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org

> Right now, after seeing how much chaos the VOP_RELEASEND stuff turned
> into and how many places other code is repeated, I'm tempted to go for
> a NDFREE() which can free struct nameidata, *including vrele/vput'ing
> aquired vp*, and which takes flags to indicate if it is to leave some
> resources behind.

NDFREE() makes sense, though I'd do the vrele/vput part later as a
separate step. 

Regards,


Mike



To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message