From owner-freebsd-current Tue Apr 8 03:46:53 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id DAA02059 for current-outgoing; Tue, 8 Apr 1997 03:46:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from parkplace.cet.co.jp (parkplace.cet.co.jp [202.32.64.1]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id DAA02034; Tue, 8 Apr 1997 03:46:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (michaelh@localhost) by parkplace.cet.co.jp (8.8.5/CET-v2.1) with SMTP id KAA10918; Tue, 8 Apr 1997 10:46:38 GMT Date: Tue, 8 Apr 1997 19:46:38 +0900 (JST) From: Michael Hancock To: Terry Lambert cc: current@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: DISCUSS: vnode references as open instances In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-current@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk On Tue, 8 Apr 1997, Michael Hancock wrote: > Terry, > > I think it will be hard to get support to change ufs this drastically at > this time since Kirk is working on soft updates. And there is also quite > of a bit of community interest in having a trusted stable fs > implementation to fall back on. > > How you considered what Netcom? did with tfs? It seems they use their own > vnode allocation scheme. I vaguely remember seeing changes made to allow > this. I just verified this. Grep for VT_TFS in /sys/kern. It's a special case hack, but maybe we can come up with a more general way of informing the kernel that we're doing our own vnode management. Regards, Mike