From owner-freebsd-fs Sun Sep 6 16:50:20 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA12909 for freebsd-fs-outgoing; Sun, 6 Sep 1998 16:50:20 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from ns1.yes.no (ns1.yes.no [195.119.24.10]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id QAA12902 for ; Sun, 6 Sep 1998 16:50:18 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from eivind@bitbox.follo.net) Received: from bitbox.follo.net (bitbox.follo.net [195.204.143.218]) by ns1.yes.no (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id BAA05828 for ; Mon, 7 Sep 1998 01:50:15 +0200 (CEST) Received: (from eivind@localhost) by bitbox.follo.net (8.8.8/8.8.6) id BAA24153; Mon, 7 Sep 1998 01:50:13 +0200 (MET DST) Message-ID: <19980907015012.60821@follo.net> Date: Mon, 7 Sep 1998 01:50:12 +0200 From: Eivind Eklund To: fs@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: vput(proc) patches Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 0.89.1i Sender: owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Just FYI, I'm not going to commit these, due to veto from Those That Know Better (in this case, bde). If somebody want to argue it, that's where to address the complaints. Eivind. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-fs Mon Sep 7 13:16:15 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA28816 for freebsd-fs-outgoing; Mon, 7 Sep 1998 13:16:15 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from sv01.cet.co.jp (sv01.cet.co.jp [210.171.56.2]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id NAA28811 for ; Mon, 7 Sep 1998 13:16:13 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from michaelh@cet.co.jp) Received: from localhost (michaelh@localhost) by sv01.cet.co.jp (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id UAA22309; Mon, 7 Sep 1998 20:14:39 GMT (envelope-from michaelh@cet.co.jp) Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1998 05:14:39 +0900 (JST) From: Michael Hancock To: Eivind Eklund cc: fs@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: vput(proc) patches In-Reply-To: <19980907015012.60821@follo.net> 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 Personally, I think the having a proc arg is good. They can probably folded in at later time when more smp design/work is done. I generally agree with Poul's suggestion that he posted a while back, that we should do coarse grained locking with a lock per subsystem. Regards, Mike On Mon, 7 Sep 1998, Eivind Eklund wrote: > Just FYI, I'm not going to commit these, due to veto from Those That > Know Better (in this case, bde). If somebody want to argue it, that's > where to address the complaints. > > Eivind. > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message