From owner-freebsd-current Sun Jan 5 12:58:39 2003 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7040C37B401 for ; Sun, 5 Jan 2003 12:58:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from rootlabs.com (root.org [67.118.192.226]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 911BD43EC2 for ; Sun, 5 Jan 2003 12:58:37 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from nate@rootlabs.com) Received: (qmail 8038 invoked by uid 1000); 5 Jan 2003 20:58:38 -0000 Date: Sun, 5 Jan 2003 12:58:38 -0800 (PST) From: Nate Lawson To: Bruce Evans Cc: current@freebsd.org, phk@freebsd.org Subject: Re: specfs lock plumbing broken In-Reply-To: <20030106031002.N295-100000@gamplex.bde.org> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Mon, 6 Jan 2003, Bruce Evans wrote: > - spec_print() is of low quality: it doesn't print the device name or number. > - devfs_print() would be reachable but doesn't exist, so vprint() prints > even lower quality output for devfs since there nothing prints an inode > number either. I was the one who left vprint in a not-so-desirable state. I plan to fix it very soon if you can tell me what info should be printed at what layer. For instance, several fs's print the device but this is probably unnecessary since specfs could do this. Care to elaborate? -Nate To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message