From owner-freebsd-fs Fri Nov 26 7:21:20 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from ns1.yes.no (ns1.yes.no [195.204.136.10]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CB31514C9C for ; Fri, 26 Nov 1999 07:21:08 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from eivind@bitbox.follo.net) Received: from bitbox.follo.net (bitbox.follo.net [195.204.143.218]) by ns1.yes.no (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id QAA14154; Fri, 26 Nov 1999 16:21:07 +0100 (CET) Received: (from eivind@localhost) by bitbox.follo.net (8.8.8/8.8.6) id QAA44337; Fri, 26 Nov 1999 16:21:07 +0100 (MET) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 1999 16:21:07 +0100 From: Eivind Eklund To: Terry Lambert Cc: fs@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: namei() and freeing componentnames Message-ID: <19991126162107.C44210@bitbox.follo.net> References: <19991112000359.A256@bitbox.follo.net> <199911241819.LAA19803@usr08.primenet.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0i In-Reply-To: <199911241819.LAA19803@usr08.primenet.com>; from tlambert@primenet.com on Wed, Nov 24, 1999 at 06:19:52PM +0000 Sender: owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Wed, Nov 24, 1999 at 06:19:52PM +0000, Terry Lambert wrote: > The main grossness comes from the use of "goto" statements > and targets in the macro definitions. This can be alleviated > be incorporating the path name free into the "bail out" case, > and preinitializing the path name buffer pointer to NULL so > that it can be tested for validity on a premature exit. I've already done this in my patches :) > I also think that the primary evil of the additional VOP is that > it takes the code further from where it needs to be. The abomination > that is NFS cookies is a result of overloading the VOP_LOOKUP code > in order to obtain directory restart, when the underlying FS's > directory entry block entry (struct dirent) is larger than the > one that you proxy over the wire. > > I think that the correct way to deal with this is to define an > externalization VOP seperate from the VOP_LOOKUP, which will > do the data externalization for you. I do not get this. Could you give a few more details of what change(s) you are thinking of? E.g, a short description of what VOP you want, including what input parameters and output parameters you see for it? Eivind. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message