Date: Wed, 28 Aug 1996 12:31:38 -0500 (EST) From: John Dyson <dyson@dyson.iquest.net> To: terry@lambert.org (Terry Lambert) Cc: michaelh@cet.co.jp, terry@lambert.org, eric@ms.uky.edu, freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG, current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: vclean (was The VIVA file system) Message-ID: <199608281731.MAA00358@dyson.iquest.net> In-Reply-To: <199608281650.JAA26928@phaeton.artisoft.com> from "Terry Lambert" at Aug 28, 96 09:50:18 am
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > The file type is a non-zero value in the high bits of the mode word; > it means that the inode does not refer to real data any more. > > The vgone call is just part of the subsystem I think should be replaced > wholesale; I'd like to see a per FS vrele() (back to locally managed > pools) replace most of those calls. The vgone() calls vgone1() calls > vclean, and we're back in my hate-zone. > > I tend to agree with you that it makes more sense to have VOP_VGET and friends be on a per-filesystem basis (well, you know what I mean -- we should consider creating VOP_VGET/VOP_VREF/VOP_VRELE/VOP_VPUT.) I think that it would certainly clean up the layering abstraction that we have. In fact, I had created ssuch a few years ago -- but like usual, VM issues take up all of my time. Right now, I am finding more problems with LFS than I had thought. Not to worry, should still have a soln this weekend. John
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199608281731.MAA00358>