From owner-cvs-all Sun Sep 19 12:54:23 1999 Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org Received: from feral.com (feral.com [192.67.166.1]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E945814D4A; Sun, 19 Sep 1999 12:54:19 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from mjacob@feral.com) Received: from semuta.feral.com (semuta [192.67.166.70]) by feral.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA32411; Sun, 19 Sep 1999 12:49:44 -0700 Date: Sun, 19 Sep 1999 12:51:18 -0700 (PDT) From: Matthew Jacob Reply-To: mjacob@feral.com To: Poul-Henning Kamp Cc: Peter Wemm , Matthew Dillon , dg@root.com, Greg Lehey , cvs-committers@FreeBSD.ORG, cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: User block device access (was: cvs commit: src/sys/miscfs/specfs spec_vnops.c src/sys/sys vnode.h src/sys/kern vfs_subr.c) In-Reply-To: <17261.937766384@critter.freebsd.dk> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk On Sun, 19 Sep 1999, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: > In message <19990919183556.802C81CA7@overcee.netplex.com.au>, Peter Wemm writes > : > > >I personally like the idea of doing buffered IO via the VM system. > >[...]. struct buf then > >becomes just a plain IO request for the device interface. Of course, this > >is easier said than done so I'll shut up now. :-) > > Now *that* would be a neat way to do it. That would definitely be the right thing to do, but it means that any performance problems would have the VM and the FileSystem folks all pointing fingers at each other... :-) To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message