From owner-freebsd-current Sun Jun 14 23:06:46 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id XAA17410 for freebsd-current-outgoing; Sun, 14 Jun 1998 23:06:46 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (critter.freebsd.dk [195.8.129.14]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id XAA17403 for ; Sun, 14 Jun 1998 23:06:42 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from phk@critter.freebsd.dk) Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by critter.freebsd.dk (8.8.7/8.8.5) with ESMTP id IAA03803; Mon, 15 Jun 1998 08:04:54 +0200 (CEST) To: Julian Elischer cc: Brian Somers , current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: RFC: Change to the device interface In-reply-to: Your message of "Sun, 14 Jun 1998 22:25:32 PDT." Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 08:04:53 +0200 Message-ID: <3799.897890693@critter.freebsd.dk> From: Poul-Henning Kamp Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG >maybe its a better idea to specify what the AIM is first :-) > >I have a request from Justin that he wants to be associate an open >(or mode upgrade) with a user (we can already do that) and >an IO request with a particular open and to be aware at any time >of how many clients he has. > >point 1 is normal (struct proc *) >point 2 needs something like what I suggest >point 3 would be covered by your suggestion. > >so the question is: what do we want? > >I personally like th idea of ALWAYS being able to link an io request >to some session, even if just for accounting purposes. Depends what the cost would be... I guess a struct proc * in each struct buf... But I have a hard time thinking about it now, can we postpone it till after USENIX ? -- Poul-Henning Kamp FreeBSD coreteam member phk@FreeBSD.ORG "Real hackers run -current on their laptop." "ttyv0" -- What UNIX calls a $20K state-of-the-art, 3D, hi-res color terminal To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message