From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG  Fri Mar 26 15:28:10 2010
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D7BF3106564A
	for <freebsd-fs@freebsd.org>; Fri, 26 Mar 2010 15:28:10 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from mckusick@mckusick.com)
Received: from chez.mckusick.com (chez.mckusick.com [64.81.247.49])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A329B8FC12
	for <freebsd-fs@freebsd.org>; Fri, 26 Mar 2010 15:28:10 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from chez.mckusick.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by chez.mckusick.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o2QFSAuI037251;
	Fri, 26 Mar 2010 08:28:10 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from mckusick@chez.mckusick.com)
Message-Id: <201003261528.o2QFSAuI037251@chez.mckusick.com>
To: Andriy Gapon <avg@freebsd.org>
In-reply-to: <4BACB3F5.7010905@freebsd.org> 
Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2010 08:28:10 -0700
From: Kirk McKusick <mckusick@mckusick.com>
Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org, freebsd-geom@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: g_vfs_open and bread(devvp, ...) 
X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Filesystems <freebsd-fs.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-fs>,
	<mailto:freebsd-fs-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-fs>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-fs@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-fs-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-fs>,
	<mailto:freebsd-fs-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2010 15:28:10 -0000

I have reviewed your change and I believe that your analysis is
correct. I am in agreement with your making the change.

As disk sector sizes will be growing in the near future, it would
be desirable to get away from having DEV_BSIZE hard-coded. But as
you note, that is a far bigger change than this one.

	Kirk McKusick