Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 14 Jun 1999 17:13:38 -0400
From:      "David E. Cross" <crossd@cs.rpi.edu>
To:        freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Subject:   umapfs...
Message-ID:  <199906142113.RAA20328@cs.rpi.edu>

next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
I have been looking at the code for UMAPfs... I am trying to understand 
conceptually why it is so unstable...  It looks straightforward enough as
simply passing the calls it receives on to the FS below it, almost like it
didn't exist at all.  Why does this cause problems?  Isn't the only difference
between a UMAP/UNION FS and a "native" FS an additional stack frame in the
kernel?

(As I am starting to wrap up this FS adventure, I am looking to start another:)

--
David Cross                               | email: crossd@cs.rpi.edu 
Systems Administrator/Research Programmer | Web: http://www.cs.rpi.edu/~crossd 
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute,         | Ph: 518.276.2860            
Department of Computer Science            | Fax: 518.276.4033
I speak only for myself.                  | WinNT:Linux::Linux:FreeBSD


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




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199906142113.RAA20328>