Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 5 Sep 2013 11:20:22 -0400 (EDT)
From:      Benjamin Kaduk <kaduk@MIT.EDU>
To:        Rick Macklem <rmacklem@uoguelph.ca>
Cc:        freebsd-fs <freebsd-fs@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: fixing "umount -f" for the NFS client
Message-ID:  <alpine.GSO.1.10.1309051118360.16692@multics.mit.edu>
In-Reply-To: <1345367028.18318718.1378328159276.JavaMail.root@uoguelph.ca>
References:  <1345367028.18318718.1378328159276.JavaMail.root@uoguelph.ca>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 4 Sep 2013, Rick Macklem wrote:

> Benjamin Kaduk wrote:
>>
>> I think there are spare vfsops fields, so the MFC can be done in an
>> ABI-compatible way.  The new routine is for optional functionality,
>> so it
>> seems fine.
>>
> There are spares vfs ops in 10/current, but not in stable/9. An MFC will
> result in a VFS ABI change. (Since 10.0 hasn't been released yet, I didn't
> use one of the recently added spares.)

Oh, right, I was looking at 10/current.

Unless there are pressing calls for the feature in the stable branches, 
it's probably best to hold off on the MFC, then.  OpenAFS has encountered 
a few KBI incompatibilities over the years (mostly in the networking bits, 
if I remember correctly), and we can deal in the future, but not having to 
is nice.

Thanks,

Ben



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?alpine.GSO.1.10.1309051118360.16692>