From owner-freebsd-current  Tue Oct 31 06:25:51 1995
Return-Path: owner-current
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) id GAA15885
          for current-outgoing; Tue, 31 Oct 1995 06:25:51 -0800
Received: from Root.COM (implode.Root.COM [198.145.90.17])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) with ESMTP id GAA15878
          for <current@freebsd.org>; Tue, 31 Oct 1995 06:25:48 -0800
Received: from corbin.Root.COM (corbin [198.145.90.50]) by Root.COM (8.6.12/8.6.5) with ESMTP id GAA02483; Tue, 31 Oct 1995 06:25:47 -0800
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by corbin.Root.COM (8.6.12/8.6.5) with SMTP id GAA09530; Tue, 31 Oct 1995 06:21:27 -0800
Message-Id: <199510311421.GAA09530@corbin.Root.COM>
To: Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org>
cc: current@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: *MORE* FS problems, please fix! 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Mon, 30 Oct 95 13:39:09 MST."
             <199510302039.NAA06584@phaeton.artisoft.com> 
From: David Greenman <davidg@Root.COM>
Reply-To: davidg@Root.COM
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Date: Tue, 31 Oct 1995 06:21:27 -0800
Sender: owner-current@freebsd.org
Precedence: bulk

> The locking subsystem is *incorrectly* implementing locking via a
> call to vn_* from the file system specific lock code.
> 
> 
> The design says that the FS specific lock code is, in fact, advisory.

   Advisory locks *are* advisory. The advisory locking is implemented via
VOP_ADVLOCK() in the appropriate system calls. Is this another case where
you completely misunderstand, at the most fundamental level, how the code
works? If you're looking at VOP_LOCK/VOP_UNLOCK and thinking that these have
something to do with file locking, look again, they don't.

-DG